Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CCDA Packet - 02/07/2017
City of''I'igard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Revised February 6, 2017: Agenda Item No. 6 &Agenda Item No. 7: New attachments added. MEETING DATE AND TIME: February 7,2017 - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated;it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be beard in any order after 7.30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-718-2419, (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-718-2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deao. SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://live.tigard-or.goy CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m.The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 P.M. Monday 6:00 a.m. City-of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Revised February 6,2017.- Agenda Item No.6&Agenda Item No.7:New attachments added. MEETING DATE AND TIME: February 7, 2017 - 6:30 p.m.Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM A. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please) A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication B. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council and City Center Development Agency) These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion.Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: A. CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECEIVE AND FILE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN ORDINANCES B. CONSIDER APPROVING THE CHANGE IN BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS C. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: •December 20,2016 •January 24,2017 •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Counall City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION 6:35 p.m. estimated time 5. CONSIDER APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER 7:15 p.m. estimated time 6. REFER BALLOT MEASURE TO VOTERS FOR TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN 7:20 p.m. estimated time 7. REFER THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN TO THE VOTERS 7:25 p.m. estimated time 8. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING-APPEAL:TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AT 72ND AVENUE AND DARTMOUTH 7:30 p.m. estimated time 9. REVIEW OF HUNZIKER INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 8:30 p.m. estimated time 10. CONSIDER TIGARD STREET HERITAGE TRAIL: CONNECTOREGON VI IGA WITH ODOT 8:45 p.m. estimated time 11. CONTINUATION OF LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO TMC 15.06.020 PERMITTING FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS WITH SPECIAL AND COUNTY DISTRICTS 8:55 p.m. estimated time 12. NON AGENDA ITEMS 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss real property transaction negotiations,under ORS 192.660(2)(e).All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 9:10 p.m. estimated time 14. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p.m. estimated time AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: February 7, 2017 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: / — Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip 22 Phone No, a —" 2_!t— Name: Also,please spell your name as it s unds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address S City State O2 Zip q 7 2-2-'S Phone No. -�d 3 y��0 3 7 5-0 Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION I:\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 170207.doc l:3 R ANT N DR MANZANITA ST _Y j R `J ` � 'NORTH DAKOTA 5T ! �� W uN'Rf �R E TERC eP > MILLVI T RLHEIGHT , Q D R � ar J'`pET DR ■ SU R STtclFA s Rt 1 P E? Z • / M J J: P AS z Tigan o� Mary Woodward 1 LOO ALCON RISE DR Elementary s Tin Plaza V ._E Yr'4 ORNING H DR / KATHERINE ST i ` mss, ` NEST o "— $ � .� `oma E4• f t4 II C°nrye °MM fR J2 � " •\z W � � Windmill YNN 5 rn T a� - �'oPnsr2g�raii c QST .. ._. Part` ANN S7 J `N r,. l , WALNUT Lr, ERROL ST • t,- s'i — ��f 81CJ 11.1 P SChoCt A ue is CARMEN STS ~ harle. ♦ P el N FONNER T pj�ESpOEp EleEp$? T Q� 97 ON r ..-BEAGLE • `2Vpt� Lr" JAMES ST DERRY DELL CT ry ry STRIDGE o< - ` '• SPARK ST if t MARION ST o� HEStS a ,•,,.. m _.. �` OOP w IH LLOW LN e� p� L ° > P 9� COOK L < r v o3 v CLPGQ 0� GEEHN r UAIL CR EK LN �P �-� J u W WAI n d FAIRHAVEN T 3 C) MEN{ I IAL S2Sp .(,R = W E CERSLO� x FAIRHAVEN WAY �F Y `p�\E�•( C1� CY .V W LN Q- P EDGEWOOD ST v ti m r GARDEN PARK PL Q MILLVIEW ST \` Bull MO vunrnnoNr StANtho I} °� Cemete Mt COL LN 4 41N O Q JANZEN C T 2 <{ i 9 '�� IF = a LROSE CT NDLER DR '^ „DR z 9 L w7� OUCNI LLY CT k T o f rz- MCFARLAND BLVD 000 Cp '• a VIEW g V TERtz WiLDW00 ® 'INEZ ST A RY L r"O` T Tigard PEMBROOK ST fiddle vangelical o East to BAT Herl ee James PINEBROKS ON L 1 DR a ELEerAp cr Cemetery o Templeton pay Alb INTERVIE o --�-r- �y F Elementary s �V r > 3 -1 WOOD DR VIEWCREST CT c r D 'i 4. o HAZEL_ I WAY / �PQ ASPEN BS��W �� p LADY MAR MARION F=- _�J HOMIESTtES�t a �•j$t RE;iN IIry Thellmes Thursday,February 2,2017 M6944060 TigardTimes.com A7 Tigard council approves medium-density residential rezone north of Fred Meyer ■ Council's decisionChristina Hanson contended Project manager Morgan pointed out that the hearing that"density does decrease liv- Will said the developer also was a quasi-judicial proceed- ability,"referring to how tight- has tailored its plan to pre- ing, meaning that the City 1 ly packed the houses Stafford serve an old oak tree on the Council's responsibility at the from neighbors, - Land Co.envisions will be and property and maintain some Jan.24 meeting was to judge CPO 4M "" their relatively small lot sizes. greenspace. the application based on "'" "" "" -" ,v�� "I don't see how making One of the residents who tes- whether it meets the criteria R 5 more houses with smaller tired in opposition to the re- set out in the city's code. By MARK MILLER yards does anything for the zoning request and concept "In reality,to me,it does The Times - children. The kids need to plan.Jan.24 was Scott Ronnie, meet the criteria,"Cook said. - - , -� -;;; „", _,,,„ ,• ,•e,+ play,"Hanson said."And it who lives on 78th Avenue.He "I think we've hashed out 'Phe wheels of develop- talks in your City of Tigard, pointed out that residents face enough,and I agree 1 would ment keep on turning in Ti- - your parks master plan about a long and dangerous walk on love to see some type of differ- _ ,a,.. ,,., o,". gard,with the City Council ;_� ', ""' .,':_ having parks and how parks roads without sidewalks to get 'ent concept plan,but I'm not voting 3-1 last Tuesday,Jan. +,�,y';,_•, 'F'i. are needed, and how much to the nearest public park, getting a choice A,B or C." 24,to approve a rezoning re- - _ more property is becoming un- which is Metzger Park. Councilor Tom Anderson,a quest and concept plan fora -.. - available this size,and prices "These people will be com- former city planning commis- medium-density residential ��. ,W„ M �; �` just keep going up.So I think plaining about not having a sioner,said Stafford Land Co.'s subdivision oft Spruce ' :- you should grab this before it greenspace or a park in the fu- plan for the property is"really Street,just north of Fred -o. turns into this." lure,"Ronnie said of the future about as good as you're going Meyer on Pacific Highway. 25 - residents at Spruce Street and to do if you're going to stay The decision came after a Neighbors concerned about 72nd Avenue. with R-12." public hearing that lasted - safety as traffic increases He added,"There's a need "If this was any part of the about two and a half hours, - But David Mangold, who for a park.I know Tigard really city,this plan is pretty viable," with aggrieved neighbors—in- said he lives in a home on near- emphasizes that greenspace, Anderson said."IC's got some eluding the chairman of Com- Mer CeueTESY or TME cm or TIGAAD by Legacy Oak Way that is and this would be a great place greenspace.We've seen these munity Participation Orgam7a- A map shows in maroon where Stafford Land Company Inc.is seeking similar to the ones in Stafford to put it." developments before,and they tion 4M,which represents resi- to develop a residential subdivision on the northern edge of Tigard.The land Co.'s concept plan,had a According to Will,Stafford are affordable.l know$350,000 dents of unincorporated Wash- Tigard City Council signed off on a zoning change and concept plan for different perspective. The Land Co.does plan to widen doesn't seem affordable,but in ington County living in the Ti- the property Tuesday. houses being proposed would the roadway adjacent to its Tigard,that is the low end. gard area—coming up one by _.. , !.„_�,,,”„ ,..,.,r,..,�.,..._„,,,�„,er,. be more affordable than many proposed development and And I think that they will look one to criticize the develop- « other homes in the area,he construct curbs,sidewalks and nice for a period of years.” ment proposal and plead with Picture yourself living in my house and having said,and the City of Tigard has planter strips. The council approved both councilors to reject it. this nice neighborhood,and all of the sudden, been looking for ways to in- "When this property devel- the zoning change and the Stafford Land Company Inc. crease its affordable housing ops,it will actually become concept plan,albeit with con- is the developer.Its concept Pop-pop-pop-pop,all of these houses shoot up. stock. more safe,"he said."The on- ditions that include providing plan envisions 18 skinny,two- You would not like it." "I understand the concerns street parkin will be in- public access to remaining story homes being built on the —Noreen Gibbons that people have,particularly cre tied greenspace on the property 1.54-acre property at the corner longtime residents who are once it is developed.A detailed of Spruce Street and 72nd Ave- sidered'medium-density.'So pop-pop-pop-pop,all of these planning to stay where the city twuncibr tan will be developed through nue,with some of the northern this is not compatible with the houses shoot up.You would are,but people have to 1' SIdeS�0 �� ublic hearing process. part of the property being neighborhood," Rechteger not like it....What about my somewhere,and It hinkpe ppo oodard voted no.Council maintained as greenspace. said."I understand that Tigard rights?People have rights to will live in this kind of s- Will also said Stafford Land ent Jason Snider elect- Testimony from neighbors needs housing.Of course it do with their property,yes,I ing,"Mangold said. Co.has approached the city in ed cuse himself after Jim was roughly split between needs housing. But does it understand that, they have Mangold's comple oves the past about selling the Lon ho chairs CPO 4M,ac- those who complained that put- need housing right there?" rights to sell and what to do the point,74th Avenu sident property for use as a park,but cased of bias. ting in the new subdivision Another resident asked city, with it,but what about my Cynthia Pate]zick a ed.She he had been told there was no The bject property had would disrupt their neighbor- councilors to put themselves in rights as a neighbor?Don't 1 was involved in an uccess- money in the budget for it. been z d for commercial de- hood atmosphere and quality her shoes,to understand the have a right to the quality of fu]fight to keep it an being That's not a reason City velop t since it was an- of life,and those who expressed anguish people in the neigh- life that 1 purchased?" built,she said. Councilor Marc Woodard was nexed f o Tigard.It is at the hope that the property could borhood are feeling at the Judy Castillo had sharp "As we were a ,the traf- inclined to accept for the city very e e of the city limits, become a city park instead of a prospect of 78 more houses be- words for the city councilors, fic is horrendous. hey speed not developing it as a public with u corporated Metzger housing development. ing built there. saying she is"getting sick of up and down,"P Izick said. park,in accordance with many to its rth and west. City "What I hear is'dollar sign, bow you guys are basically in "We are not no neighbor- neighbors'wishes.. Planne Gary Pagenstecher City Council accused of being dollar sign,dollar sign,"'Nor- bed with the developers." hood—we are a eeway for "I guess my point is, my said th site has been deter- too cozy with developers een Gibbons said."This is dear "I bought my home where I the people the live back thought in my head is,if the mined be undesirable for Heidi Rechteger,who lives to my heart.This is my neigh- live now,and since I've lived in there." city really wants to do some- comm tial use and is more on 74th Avenue, said she borhood.This is my home....I this home,for the last four Ken Sandblast Westlake thing or get something,there appro 'ate for residential de- bought her current house"for can barely get out of my drive- years,there has been continu- Consultants Inc., earing on is a way to get it done,"Wood- veto ent. peace and quiet"in her retire- way now,and you're going to al development,"said Castillo, behalf of the dev per,said and said during deliberations, T council's decision can ment,and that the construe- put 36-plus more cars?It just who lives on Spruce Street."I Stafford Land C concept arguing that Tigard could find be ilenged on appeal,which -tion and then the increase in doesn't make sense.It doesn't have not had one weekend plan calls for sing] amily de- the funds to make the property w d be heard by the Oregon traffic caused by the develop- have anything to do with the where I have not been woken tached residen , even a park."There has to be the L Use Board of Appeals in ment would shatter that. livability,the quality,the char- up because of development, though that is not a -12 zon- political will to get it done.So em. "This project is not compati, acter,the neighborhood flavor. and this is a problem.And all I ing in Tigard allows. I what I would ask of City Coun A�s keo after the meeting ble with our neighborhood.It's It just—it doesn't fit.." see is the City of Tigard bend- "The R-12 zoning vides cil is to have(fie ppltticaT will betjier`he intends to file'an' completely inorganic to the She continued, "Pictureing over backwards tohelp the other housing tyges:_ ud-. and courage to say,'Yes,w appeal.Long said,"We'll defi- neighborhood.I can't imagine yourself living in my house developers when there are ing multifamily and at d need a park there."' nitely look at that. 1 think why a plot of an acre and a half and having this nice neighbor- rules and regulations that housing.This isn't that," But Mayor John L.Co there's some things there that with 18 structures on it is con- hood,and all of the sudden, should be followed." blast said. - ther members of th cil have a lot of appeal." i Z":V it _ 1 Aw Mhalmn IM : lop ty 3 rrn 1 � {t u e ; P meq: �Ry 7 Ear a. 4 � r Tigard Park fj L TN0NiAH a t rn�NT System Master t Plan Update Pl< J Tigard,Oregon �k�glw W ,r r Perk + Park Opportunity Area ti==Trail Opportunities Park ort ie c r timerci Park ind t Park,.. - ac '� �. `+;� .As Street p ,' • facilities Private 0n ,' p�P r Space 'S ..••.• Trail JOG th erripn � Undeveloped 1 t Stree[ � 2 -Pocket Park Parkland 50 k ,Skate ''Park i Neighborhood f� iy Golf Course ate Park t e t ' t i �•I �N ! Community School Grounds s Senior Cen er , +� o � qsPark /�•' Libraryrq. T near Park Private Schoul .i "`� .. "�7`•-^---""--'—'c ••---% Space Public Open -Public5chool ti abcth � � � S ;i. � Special Use Other Public !"Ke f'ar ®Site Property I It _. :•:- = ertv i e , i 100P 2 . . ..Major Arteria l e, <Water Body -- i Local Street L j County Line � + _.. -- .; 'sf _ - Railroad L _ City Limits Stream `)Urban Growth Boundary COQk Park Park Concept Map --_ �nniles ". � ;rt r,k` :.. _,:� � - ...._.._. --May 2009.__.. O 5--- 0.5 ..•Ir i j + Data Source:City of Tigard GIS 'l3 -t!, rel Ile tom,- G� rz`- � I �� yet '• f : * r �- «: l..._., f rnrb.tgRrgaox. Tigard Park r System stem Master s > LlI,TNt�b4AH t � ;: c'OtiNTY` Y Y i r r Y Plan Update � t t Tigard,Oregon IOU Park- l ! az'fa�}1t.wy`Y y 7 N•• t S "a F�y� •, 'F .'r :- ..... t .Tx Park Opportunity Area _ � A s ac ac• „ _ +'" I"-,, 43i -1. I .4 _. .. q / ��99 ♦ I^+'ry 4'k". Trail Opportunities x ✓' u Hat .� F � ..,a fid .a.. � '! t�< i. ': ... "w.'„••� �/� � � 4 a'SE� y,V'<r e''. . � q oo fir, .... :• ' Drt I�Mfs; y. a"` k wt arkrct Park yTi r „IPark a"r'nk�•.;.y, ?< SMattf �X'f '•'3..Da ob JPiam�ricGtdfft t".hr s ` t u 9Private Open Facilities Spaceat 1b , ...... Trail �:.... Undeveloped I Pocket Park Parkland �d •' T ;_._ �,, ,,••Par .� ,, of �,x `- +•" - �q r r - - - Neighborhood `+ r �•T'j� r�,t}' r �`l _.. 7 r Park_ t r i � >inM:. x - Nei hborhood Golf Course (pPar Do l L_ y' Senio rs- use j& Y School Grotmds j d "Park Library Cpl § �� Linear Park Private Schtwl �- x —— -- R7pj Public Open Public School __... L�11.N ace .•`'/� l.d. "' i,!n: �, lizabIth ar C- .. fk'`tt �y,,:.p ®Special Use .. Other Public Cf P6; e Par Site Property R i -..-- to e•. s t 1,'`I A•talor Anginal Water Body 5 i 1:2i _— .? 1 >'��< �' '., rnvY.ax aY C` .... AAdke Local Street L County Line ,( s •€ lF` 1 -"+ ...h' t .... .. .__--..- Railroad I City Limits M , l Y l _..i s i; .. Stream 1 Urban Growth 1, tr' . "y t �xz„ f "z: �.,. - Boundary xX' (L Pr It: ,,#; Map 3: cook Pad Park Concept Map -- --,_ _ .._ ............... May 2009 0250� ©, ' Data Source City of Tigard CIS rsow _I t Wff y�� �� cl TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS BY PARK TYPE The recommended improvements to Tigard's park system are detailed according to park classification. Proposed additional park types are included in the discussion of the park classification that the new park is intended to fit. COMMUNITY PARKS Recommendations for the Community Park category include decreasing the current Level of Service (LOS) standard to 3.0 acres/1,000 residents. Recommendations for specific community park sites are detailed below. Cook Park Cook Park is Tigard's largest and most diverse park. Current and future potential for this park includes expanding sports tournaments and festivals that attract people from around the region. The park is home to the Tigard Festival of Balloons,held each June, and a number of sports tournaments. Cook Park's river location provides easy access for canoeing, kayaking,boating,fishing and many miles of scenic waterways. It serves as a connection with the Fanno Creek regional trail.Recommendations for this park include: • Make improvements to support large festivals;and • Replace group picnic area in west portion of the park recently destroyed by fire. Summerlake Park Summerlake Park is a classic community park supporting a wide range of activities. Three foot-bridges cross its waterways,making Summerlake Lake the centerpiece of this park.The lake is home to numerous waterfowl and aquatic animals and this central area of open space is interspersed with small wooded areas where park visitors can enjoy the natural surroundings. Tennis courts,a basketball court,two playground areas and several picnic tables provide recreational opportunities. The small designated off-leash dog area in the park is the only off-leash dog facility in west Tigard. Recommendations for this park include: • Complete implementation of the Summerlake Master Plan. CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 55 TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE Proposed Cach Community Park(P5) Cach Park represents one of a few land areas this size in Tigard.The site is made up of two pieces of undeveloped park land (Cach and Clute �u; properties)with a large reservoir site in between.The original acreage purchased has limitations due to the Metro Greenspaces bond funds used to purchase it.Further, the water utility site will have limitations for park use due to the size of the required storage facility and security requirements.The City should continue to acquire land in this area to develop Cach Community Park.The eventual development of this park needs to be observant of the protections and limitations of this site but should also attempt to meet community needs for developed facilities, particularly larger-scale facilities,such as sports fields and large group gathering areas,if possible. Recommendations for this park include: • Develop a site master plan that addresses the complexity of the site and its importance to the future of the Tigard park system; • Integrate the water property into the design of the overall park, with attention to security needs for the reservoir; and • Implement the site master plan to develop a full-featured community park.This should include local park amenities on the Clute property. Proposed Fowler Park(P4) With a historic grove of oak trees and Native American significance,the Fowler property represents a unique mix of environmental and historical opportunity for the City. The property also has existing competitive sports fields adding variety to the potential recreation opportunities.Upon acquisition,the Trust for Public Land will transfer rights to the property to the City with some development restrictions. It is intended to serve as a community park with large undeveloped open space with developed fields for baseball and football. Recommendations for this park include: • Complete a master plan that will guide future park development. This master plan will need to address the limitations placed on the property by the purchase funding(proposed funding includes Metro Greenspaces bond funds).The Master Plan should also address the historic and environmental values of this property in balance with the desires for expanded recreation opportunities; and • Implement the adopted master plan,in phases if necessary. 56 CHAPTER 6 IMPLEMENTATION TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE Proposed Community Park(P 11) The area north of Durham Road and south of downtown Tigard has an opportunity for an additional community park. Recommendations for this park include: • Consider Templeton Elementary School/Twality Middle School for a school park with community park amenities; • In partnership with the School District, complete a site master plan that identifies improvements to existing amenities and new school park facilities to enhance the quality and function of recreation facilities on this site. Examples of improvements could include upgraded sports fields,restrooms(available after school hours) community gathering and specialized play areas; • If a school park is not feasible, the City should identify and acquire as large a property as possible to accommodate competitive sports facilities, larger play areas and community gathering places, complete a master plan for this site;and • Implement improvements identified in the approved master plan. Proposed Community Park/Sports Complex(P13) Identifying land within existing parks for additional sports fields may be difficult due to size and use constrictions. The development of a sports complex is an alternative approach to meeting the future demand for sports fields and other large-scale outdoor recreation opportunities. Concentrating sports field development offers an opportunity to also concentrate supporting facilities such as parking and restrooms,thus making the most use of each facility investment. A community park and sports complex should be considered to provide additional formal sports fields for a broad mix of outdoor sports uses including fields and courts. Because of the land-intensive nature of sport fields, 20-50 acres will likely be required. Land may be available in Tigard,but consideration should be given to land outside of current city limits but within Tigard's Urban Growth Boundary.A site for a future sports complex has not been identified and does not appear on the plan maps. Recommendations include: • Identifying and acquiring an adequately sized site; • A master plan process that further analyzes the specific types of sports facilities needed;and • Development according to the master plan. CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 57 TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Changes in the ways that people use parks creates opportunities to meet basic park needs in a variety of settings, not just neighborhood parks. Recommendations for the Neighborhood Parks category include decreasing the current LOS to 1.5 acres/1,000 residents.Site specific recommendations are detailed below. Bonita Park This park is one of the most recently constructed in the City.There are several native planting areas at Bonita Park, including two seasonal wetlands,native plantings along Fanno Creek,and an area of naturally occurring camas. The site also includes sports courts and play areas for all ages. Recommendations for this park include: • Address the crossing at Bonita Road to create additional safe routes to the park and for the regional trail connection; and • Connect the Fanno Creek trail at the north end of Bonita Park (T11). Elizabeth Price Park This park is the smallest neighborhood park in the Tigard system,serving much of the south west corner of Tigard. Built on a hillside reservoir site, this park represents a creative use of public land.Amenities include play equipment,a paved interpretive trail and picnic tables.This park should be maintained with amenities replaced as their life-cycle warrants. Jack Park Jack Park is the only neighborhood park that provides a baseball field. This is a small field,suitable for Little League play.The site lies adjacent F to Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue,Station 50,where the fire department has donated land for additional park amenities.The land will be available Fall 2009.Recommendations for this park include: • Continue with expansion of the park(underway in 2009) and integration with the fire station.This will expand the amenities at this site to include off-street parking,community meeting room, additional play structures and special uses,such as community gardens; • Develop a basic site master plan to guide future improvements to this site; • Construct a trail bridge to connect Jack Park with the additional property and amenities at Fire Station 50; and 58 CHAPTER 6 IMPLEMENTATION TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE • Consider upgrading the park trail if trail segments T5 and T9 are constructed.This could make Jack Park a significant trailhead for the area. Northview Park This small park on the west edge of Tigard sits on a small plateau overlooking Beaverton.The park includes open turf areas and play equipment. Recommendations for this park include: • Design a connection to the Westside Trail; and • Upgrade the open turf area. Woodard Park Tucked away in the center of the city,Woodard Park is the largest neighborhood park.The park is best known for its large oak trees and ponderosa pines;park structures were specifically designed around these mature trees. Park-goers can hear the creek babble along while walking the Fanno Creek trail as it winds through this quiet, neighborhood park. Recommendations for this park include: • Continue restoration projects in the south part of the park; • Develop the continuation of the Fanno Creek Trail along proposed segment T7; and • Connect the park with the existing trail through proposed segment T8. Tigard Triangle Area(P3) The City is developing a plan for the area defined by Interstate 5 and Highways 217 and 99, called the Tigard Triangle Plan.This area is identified for commercial uses requiring a different focus when considering appropriate park or recreation facility needs. Recommendations for park facilities in this area include: • Address park and recreation needs for this area in the final Tigard Triangle Plan; • Develop an on and off-street trail loop in the area with benches and other trail amenities; and • Explore the potential for a small plaza with seating for employee breaks. CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 59 TIGARD PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN UPDATE Proposed Neighborhood Park(P12) No neighborhood park amenities exist in the area south of Bonita, east of Hall and north of Durham in Tigard. There may be potential to acquire 6- 7 acres of land in this area. However, much of this land is in the Fanno Creek floodplain. Recommendations for this area include: • Identify and acquire site for a neighborhood park to serve this area; • Consider the addition of sports fields on the proposed site, requiring large flat areas suitable for development; • Develop a master plan for the identified park site; and • Implement the adopted master plan,in phases if necessary. Proposed Neighborhood Park(P9) No neighborhood park amenities exist in the area surrounding SW Gaarde St. between Highway 99 and SW 1211`Avenue. Recommendations for this area include: • Identify and acquire site for a neighborhood park to serve this area; • Develop a master plan for the identified park site; • Implement the adopted master plan, in phases if necessary;and • Consider acquiring or leasing a portion of the nearby water department property to provide neighborhood recreation amenities for this area. Site suitability is poor due to access and visibility,so consider this as a last option. Proposed East Butte Heritage Park(P10) This site is adjacent to the Tigard House and is currently being acquired. It is intended to be a neighborhood park with basic park amenities for the local area. Recommendations for this park include: • Develop a park master plan for this site; and • Implement adopted master plan, in phases if necessary. Site should include basic park amenities to provide local park access. SCHOOL SITES The Tigard-Tualatin School District provides fields and facilities for recreation programming and Tigard Police recreation activities.This works well,but there are additional school district partnership opportunities that can enhance the Tigard Park System.The 1999 Park System Master Plan identified schools as areas to incorporate 60 CHAPTER 6 IMPLEMENTATION Mz- .N K ti •� or E 3 ry N7 370j /VI s i �.. .�..,.....«.�a..-...., '� ... �-�-�. WI- MR' S"` 03 -'b' V, J MS z LULt � i .. .:;.=. _ _.,.: �► , . "N'l laN�rl�OaINM31 /1 MLS t t lev Presented by: Neal Brown Agent Full Meadows Group Inc., Realtors Phone: 971-727-0126 E-mail: nbrown a_mead owsgroup.com LOTS AND LAND Status: ACT 2/6/2017 6:41:49 PM ML#: 16646857 Area: 151 List Price: $495,000 Address:11260 SW GAARDE ST Unit/Lot#: City: Tigard Zip: 97224 Additional Parcels: / Map Coord: Zoning: R4.5 List Type: ER LR: N County:Washington Tax ID:R0489420 Subdivision: Manufhs Okay: CC&Rs: Elem: Alberta Rider Middle: y High: Tigard Prop Type: RESID Legal: COLE'S ACRES, LOT 1 &3, PLUS ACREAGE,ACRES 1.92 Internet/Address/NO Blog/No AVM: Y/Y// Offer/Nego: CALL-LA PDF Doc(s): 2 GENERAL INFORMATION Lot Size: 1-2.99AC Acres: 1.92 Lot Dimensions: Waterfront: / Body Water: Availability: SALE #Lots: Perc Test: / RdFrntg: Y Rd Surfc: PAVEDRD Seller Disc: DSCLOSUR Other Disc: View: Lot Desc: CORNER,TREES Soil Type/Class: Topography:LEVEL, ROLLING Soil Cond: Present Use: RESIDNC IMPROVEMENTS Utilities: GAS-AVL, POW-AVL, SWR-AVL,WAT-AVL Existing Structures: Y / RESIDNC REMARKS XSt/Dir: Corner of SW112th&SW Gaarde. Driveway to residence is off SW 112th. Private: Home-sold"as is"w/no repairs made by Seller. Value in the land. Potential wetlands may limit number of lots. Seller will allow up to 30 days for buyer's due diligence. Oil tank&septic tank onsite(not decommissioned).Also see Residential listing#16684233 Public: Excellent development opportunity in the heart of Tigard.Almost 2 acres on the corner of SW Gaarde& 112th-zoned R4.5.Also see Residential listing#16684233 FINANCIAL Property Tax/Yr: $4,145.66 Spcl Asmt Balance: Tax Deferral: BAC: % 2.5 Crop/Land Lease: Short Sale: N $ Pre-Approv: Total Comm Differs: N HOA:N Dues: Other Dues: 3rd Party: N Bank Owned/REO: N HOA Incl: Terms: CASH, CONV Escrow Preference: First American BROKER/AGENTDATA BRCD: HASN05 Office:The Hasson Company Phone:503-335-9898 Fax:503-212-5188 LPID: DILLENBU Agent:Peter Dillenburger Phone:503-310-8194 Cell/Pgr:503-310-8194 Email(s)AG: peterd(d-)hasson.com Agent Ext: CoLPID: CoBRCD: CoAgent: CoPh: List: 6/18/2016 Exp: Show: CALL-LA, TEXT—LA, VACANT Poss: NEGO Tran: 11/16/2016 Owner: Finley FIRPTA: N Phone: Tenant/Other: Phone: COMPARABLE INFORMATION O/Price: $625,000 ©RMLSTm 2017.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.-INFORMATION NOT GUARANTEED AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED. SQUARE FOOTAGE IS APPROXIMATE&MAY INCLUDE BOTH FINISHED&UNFINISHED AREAS-CONSULT BROKER FOR INFO. SCHOOL AVAILABILITY SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Presented By: Neal Brown Agent Full Meadows Group Inc., Realtors Phone: 971-727-0126 E-mail: nbrown(a)mea dowsgroup.com RESIDENTIAL Status: ACT 2/6/2017 6:46:51 PM ML#: 16684233 Area: 151 List Price: $495,000 Addr:11260 SW GAARDE ST Unit#: City: Tigard Zip: 97224 Condo Loc: Ma Coord: Zoning: R4.5 List Type: ER LR: N P 9� YP County:Washington Tax ID:R0489420 Elem: Alberta Rider Middle: High: Tigard PropType: DETACHD Nhood/Bldg: CC&Rs: Legal: COLE'S ACRES, LOT 1 &3, PLUS ACREAGE,ACRES 1.92 Internet/Address/No Blog/No AVM: Y/Y// Offer/Nego:CALL-LA PDF Doc(s): 2 =; Home Energy Score: Home Wrnty: 55+w/Affidavit YIN: N GENERAL INFORMATION Lot Size: 1-2.99AC #Acres: 1.92 Lot Dimensions: Wtfrnt: View: Lot Desc: CORNER,TREES Body Water: Seller Disc: DSCLOSUR Other Disc: RESIDENCE INFORMATION Upper SQFT: 0 SFSrc: Appraiser #Bdrms: 3 #Bath: 1 /1 #Lvl: 2 Year Built: 1963/ APPROX. Main SQFT: 1292 TotUp/Mn: 1292 Roof: Style: DAYRNCH Green Cert: Energy Eff.: Lower SQFT: 1311 #Fireplaces: / INSERT, WOOD Parking: CARPORT, Exterior: LAP DRIVWAY Total SQFT: 2603 Addl. SQFT: #Gar: 2/ATTACHD, CARPORT Bsmt/Fnd: FULLBAS, PARTFIN REMARKS XSVDir: Hwy 99 to Gaarde(driveway access is on 112th) Private: Home-sold"as is"w/no repairs made by Seller.Value in the land. Potential wetlands may limit number of lots. Seller will allow up to 30 days for buyer's due diligence. Oil tank&septic tank onsite(not decommissioned). Also see Lots& Land listing#16646857. Public: Excellent development opportunity in the heart of Tigard.Almost 2 acres on the corner of SW Gaarde& 112th-zoned R4.5.Also see Lots& Land listing#16646857. APPROXIMATE ROOM SIZES AND DESCRIPTIONS Living: M/24 X 13 /FIREPL Mstr Bd: M/12 X 11 / Bths-Full/Part Kitchen: M/13 X 9 / 2nd Bd: M/11 X 11 / Upper Lvl: 0/0 Dining: M/10 X 9 / 3rd Bed: M/10 X 10/ Main Lvl: 1/1 Family: U 27 X 14 /FIREPL SHOP: L/15 X 13 / Lower Lvl: 0/0 Total Bth: 1/1 FEATURES AND UTILITIES Kitchen: BI-MICO, DISHWAS, FS-RANG Interior: LAUNDRY,VNYL-FL,WW-CARP Exterior: TL-SHED,YARD Accessibility: MNBDBTH Cool: Heat: FOR-AIR Water: PUBLIC Sewer: PUBLIC Hot Water: Fuel: GAS FINANCIAL Property Tax/Yr: $4,145.66 Spcl Asmt Balance: Tax Deferral: BAC: % 2.5 Terms: CASH, CONV Short Sale: N $ Pre-Approv: 3rd Party: N Total Comm Differs: N Escrow Pref: Bank Owned/REO: N HOA:N Dues: Other Dues: Rent, If Rented: HOA Incl: BROKER/AGENT DATA BRCD: HASN05 Office:Hasson Company Phone:503-335-9898 Fax:503-212-5188 LPID: DILLENBU Agent:Peter Dillenburger Phone:503-310-8194 Cell/Pgr:503-310-8194 Email(s)AG: peterdahasson.com Agent Ext: CoLPID: CoBRCD: CoAgent: CoPh: ShowHrs: Tran: 12/6/2016 List: 11/16/2016 Exp: Occ: VACANT Poss: LB/Loc/Cmb: Hose Bib Front Owner: Finley FIRPTA: N Phone: Show: RMLSLBX,TEXT—LA,VACANT Tenant/Other: Phone: COMPARABLE INFORMATION O/Price: $495,000 ©RMLSTm 2017.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.-INFORMATION NOT GUARANTEED AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED. SQUARE FOOTAGE IS APPROXIMATE&MAY INCLUDE BOTH FINISHED&UNFINISHED AREAS-CONSULT BROKER FOR INFO. SCHOOL AVAILABILITY SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Presented by: Neal Brown 2/6/2017 6:42:30 PM Meadows Group Inc., Realtors WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR TJ J w .mss E Reference Parcel #: 2S110AB 01400 ' S ' 107 35 74.00 7400 74. 2SI1 26103D� 17003D C c 613 I o 251D35C 2610300 MOM 26103DC 1700 .46 ACI 1300 $ 1100 q 1500 1600 ,y 5 1 2 3 _ 4 a I / I m' 107.95 7400 74.00 7400 74,00 319• 63756 15 6 EAST 24 RODS (4 CORNER 42902 / 2001.115254 2002.27748) 37-5482 CC :1UU\1WWLU1�UU11WS\\`� 1.\?\:\\\�1����1•J\WilU:S.U '.+/G1�AUUa11.11..�\,UU11t11\\\\:.WL�S -�----dam--e -{�'- `z -5}------� 200,.89027 %q7 12-6422) 20C2.66761� /' /-3 136.70 1]77 '�9 2718 105 71 109 66 7 9374 86.29 / 68.00 56.32 ` 4518 92,09 •1. t17] N99.43AOE lJ / 4100 000 20 21 AC 4700 4600 50 4400 cl 4500 1 2 6 AC0 J C , � � n- s4.� 9 r 4�4 2 I 100 A T, 000 m _ 2.87 AC 1400 QqQ$ 1 B9 76 DO 7000 55 87 ¢ B .38 AC R 1.82 AC f e _ uJ 3 100 $ 4900 8 5000 $ 5100 1 ° 2 I z f C 3 1u�''� (4 N ,62.50 u144 1UJI m 1301 JJ' it n I 11 88 W60 '7B 3188 70 00 7500 w 81 88 8600 J a _ 1400 5300 5200 z 3 7 p 6 m 5 e� `-I"I 688-25-DOW •''v O ,'PM1 I pp D u 1 56.62 68.12 ,y� 703.70 63&37-3D•N B 3�TRA. 00'p SW JACKIE CT T „70o�x 65.78 75.00 64.00 I 130 1700 ,e Ato i $ 5600 H 5700 5800 55 AC 4 / Qn 10 0 11 1200 it :J J m .18 AC 11700 y c D I 152.00 -_ 1100 '!' bD• 172.00 .23 AC 3500 1800 5 l g I.26AC o16 3300 _ .45 ACA.34 AC 1000 74 � � 6. - 152.60 M � 30 33 AC 76 1;42.50 -'� IeI 900 3200 .23 AC / 400 1900 c .53 AC a 15 3100 c \J 46 AC 6 c 3.72 AC S .38 AC 800 - >> C� .23 AC •o ``� 152.50 152.50 138 m m 6100 700 111 Property Information Department First erlmn 121 SW Morrison Street Suite 300 Portland,OR 97204 Phone:503.219.TRIO(8746) Fax:503.790.7872 Title Company of Oregon Email:pid.porlland@firstam.com THIS MAP IS PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE IN LOCATING PROPERTY. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY OF OREGON ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR ANY VARIATIONS AS MAY BE DISCLOSED BY AN ACTUAL SURVEY RMLSweb Map Address:11260 SW GAARDE ST,Tigard,OR 97224 1' 114;_ t t" to L 11430 � 1,7,_ 11320 11480t s m 412 r � � f .4w SW Cole Ln 14070 f, 1' ^» Ve 11: 146,5 11 411 1':.422 x. 0- 1 4 Y -1?4Y1•,'i51 SW Jackie Ct .. 1417 1 470 2- .. .^.t`i 'i 1.30 711;.`10 142415 100 feet 25 m 13255 14250 ©RMLSTm 2017.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED— INFORMATION NOT GUARANTEED AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED. Address: 11260 SW GAARDE ST, Tigard, OR 97224 Tax ID: R0489420 Area: 151 County: Washington Neal Brown Lots and Land 2/6/2017 6:42:07 PM 503-590-1500 Meadows Group Inc., Realtors 9 Matches MLS# Hist Status Price Date Agent Office DOM/CDOM 16646857 DAT ACT $495,000 11/16/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 151 /0 16646857 DAT ACT $495,000 11/16/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 151 /0 16646857 BOM ACT $495,000 11/16/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 151 /0 16646857 PCH WTH $495,000 11/13/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 148/0 16646857 WTH WTH $625,000 11/1/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 136/ 136 16646857 PEN PEN $625,000 8/1/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 44/44 16646857 BOM ACT $625,000 7/18/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 30 /0 16646857 PEN PEN $625,000 6/23/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 5/5 16646857 NEW ACT $625,000 6/18/2016 DILLENBU HASN05 0/0 City of Tigard M COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT System Development Charges — Revised 1/1/2017 Building permit applications submitted on or after 7/1/2016 are subject to the following system development fees,unless other �ective date is noted below. Non RT = Not in River Terrace Neighborhood In RT = In River Terrace Neighborhood To find out if your property is in the River Terrace Neighborhood,go to the City's website at www.tig_ard-or.gov and click on Maps > Maps &Apps > Boundaries > Neighborhood Networks and enter the street address in the search field, or call the planner on duty at 503-718-2421. Washington County Transportation Development Tax Non RT In RT Single Family Detached (per detached unit,including manufactured $8,278.00 $8,278.00 housing unit on individual lot) Apartment (per unit) $5,415.00 $5,415.00 Condominium/Townhouse (per attached unit,including duplex units) $4,951.00 $4,951.00 Manufactured Housing (per unit in a park) $4,142.00 $4,142.00 Assisted Living (per bed) $2,558.00 $2,558.00 Continuing Care Retirement (per unit) $2,587.00 $2,587.00 Commercial/Industrial- Call Permit Coordinator at 503-718-2426 for estimate. Tigard Transportation System Development Charge Non RT In RT Single Family Detached (per detached unit,including manufactured $5,805.00 $8,489.00 housing unit on individual lot) Apartment (per unit) $3,386.00 $4,952.00 Condominium/Townhouse (per attached unit,including duplex units) $3,386.00 $4,952.00 Tigard Parks System Development Charge Non RT In RT Single Family Unit (per detached or attached unit,including manufactured $7,178.00 $7,566.00 housing on individual lot or in a park) Multi-Family Unit (per apartment or condominium unit) $5,268.00 $5,559.00 Commercial/Industrial (per employee) $444.00 $444.00 Call Permit Coordinator at 503-718-2426 for estimate. Sewer Connection - Clean Water Services (CWS) Non RT In RT Residential (per equivalent dwelling unit,including detached,attached duplex, $5,300.00 $5,300.00 townhouse or apartment units,and manufactured housing on individual lot) Commercial/Industrial (per equivalent dwelling unit as determined by total $5,300.00 $5,300.00 plumbing fixture count) Note. Sewer connection fee is calculated based on plumbing permit application submittal date. City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov Water Quality& Quantity Facility Fee - CWS Quality Quantity Residential Single Family (per dwelling unit) $230.00 $280.00 Commercial& Multi-Family (per 2,640 square feet of additional $230.00 $280.00 impervious service) Water Meters - Tigard Water Service.Area All applicants must contact Utility Billing at 503-718-2460 to confirm the water district jurisdiction for City of Tigard addresses. All applicants must complete and submit the following to the Utility Billing counter to purchase a water meter for addresses in the Tigard Water Service Area: • Water Meter Fixture Unit Worksheet. • Copy of the date-stamped residential building permit application or commercial plumbing permit application. • Copy of the issued permit. Please check the city website for water meter sales hours of operation. Meter size: 5/8" $8,273.00 Meter size: 3/4" $11,809.00 Meter size: 1" $21,679.00 Meter size: 1-1/2" $64,186.00 Meter size: 2" $103,941.00 Note. All water meter fees include water system development charge,water meter and meter installation fee. School District Construction Excise Tax Beaverton Tigard-Tualatin School District School District Tax Rate Limits: Effective 7/1/2016 Effective 1/1/2017 Residential: per square foot on structures or portions of $1.23 $1.23 structures intended for residential use,including but not limited to single-family or multiple-unit housing. Non-Residential: per square foot on structures or $0.61 $0.61 portions of structures intended for non-residential use,not including multiple-unit housing of any kind. Non-Residential Maximum: structures intended for $30,700.00 $30,700.00 non-residential use may not exceed this amount per building permit or per structure,whichever is less. Metro Construction Excise Tax Effective 7/1/2006 Construction projects valued at$100,000 or less are exempt from this tax as $0.00 well as permits for development of affordable housing units and permits issued to 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations. Construction projects valued at over$100,000 to under$10 million will be 0.12 percent of the assessed at 0.12 percent of the value of the improvements for which a permit is improvement sought. Example: improvements valued at$250,000 x.0012 = $300.00. value Construction projects valued at more than $10 million will be assessed a $12,000.00 flat fee. Note. This temporary tax was extended through December 2020. City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov AIS-2998 3. A. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: CCDA Receive and File Urban Renewal Plan Ordinances Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: City Center Development Agency Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Receive and File Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment Ordinances. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the Board of the City Center Development Agency receive and file the ordinances approving the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and the City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On December 13, 2016, City Council approved the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment and referred it to the voters for adoption. Oregon Revised Statutes 457.125 requires that a copy of the ordinance approving an urban renewal plan shall be sent by the city's governing body to the urban renewal agency. Ordinances 16-24 and 16-25 are attached. The CCDA action to receive and file the ordinances fulfills the ORS requirement. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Not applicable. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Tigard Comprehensive Plan Special Planning Areas- Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. City Strategic Plan City Strategic Plan Goal 1: Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity. City Strategic Plan Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION December 13, 2016: Approved Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment and referred it to the voters for adoption. October 4,12016: Public Review of Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment. September 20, 2016: Discuss Adoption Process for Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and Substantial Amendment to Downtown City Center Urban Renewal Plan. Attachments Tigwd Trianale Urban Renewal Plan Ordinance 16-24 City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendendment Ordinance 16-25 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16-a y AN ORDINANCE 1ALAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD'TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED WHEREAS, the Tigard City Center Development Agency (the "Agency', as the duly authorized and acting urban renewal agency of the City of Tigard, Oregon,is proposing to undertake certain urban renewal activities in a designated area within the City pursuant to ORS Chapter 457;and WHEREAS, the Agency,pursuant to the requirements of ORS Chapter 457, has caused the preparation of the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Plan'. The Plan authorizes certain urban renewal activities within the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area(the"Area';and WHEREAS, the Agency has caused the preparation of a certain Urban Renewal Report dated December 13, 2016, attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Report' to accompany the Plan as required under ORS 457.085(3); and WHEREAS, the Agency forwarded the Plan and Report to the City's Planning Commission (the "Commission's for review and recommendation. The Commission considered the Plan and Report on November 14, 2016 and made a recommendation that the Plan conformed with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,attached hereto as Exhibit C (the"Planning Commission Recommendation';and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2016, representatives of the City met with the Washington County Board of Commissioners to review the Plan,including proposed maximum indebtedness for the Plan;and WHEREAS,the Plan and the Report were forwarded on October 5,2016 to the governing body of each taxing district affected by the Plan,and the Agency has therefore consulted and conferred with each taxing district;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council (the "City Council' received a written recommendation from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue accepting a city-proposed change to the Plan to limit Plan duration as provided for in Section VIII (D) of the Plan and to require taxing district concurrence for certain kinds of Plan amendments as provided for in Section IX(B) of the Plan;and V'HEREAS, on November 29,2016 the City caused notice of the hearing to be held before the Council on the Plan,including the required statements of ORS 457.120(3),to be mailed to all electors in the City;and WHEREAS, on December 13,2016 the City Council held a public hearing to review and consider the Plan, the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation, and the public testimony received on or before that date and to receive additional public testimony;and WHEREAS, after consideration of the record presented through this date, the City Council does by this Ordinance desire to approve the Plan. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE No. 16-oz/ Page 1 1 SECTION 1 The Plan complies with all requirements of ORS Chapter 457 and the specific criteria of 457.095(1) through (7), in that, based on the information provided in the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation,and the public testimony before the City Council: 1. The process for the adoption of the Plan, has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 457 of the Oregon Revised Statutes; 2. The area designated in the Plan as the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area is blighted, as defined by ORS 457.010(1) and is eligible for inclusion within the Plan because of conditions described in the Report in the Section "Existing Physical, Social, and Economic Conditions and Impacts on Municipal Services," including the existence of inadequate streets and other rights-of-way, open spaces, and utilities and underdevelopment of property within the Area(ORS 457.010(1)(e) and(g)); 3. The rehabilitation and redevelopment described in the Plan to be undertaken by the Agency is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare of the City because absent the completion of urban renewal projects, the Area will fail to contribute its fair share of property tax revenues to support City services and will fail to develop and/or redevelop according to the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 4. The Plan conforms to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and documented ancillary documents and provides an outline for accomplishing the projects described in the Plan, as more fully described in the Plan and in the Planning Commission Recommendation; 5. No residential displacement will occur as a result of the acquisition and disposition of land and redevelopment activities proposed in the Plan and therefore the Plan does not include provisions to house displaced persons; 6. The acquisition of real property provided in the Plan is necessary for the development of transportation-relaxed infrastructure improvements in the Area and for the development of public spaces because the Agency does not own all the real property interests (e.g., rights-of-way, easements, fee ownership, etc.) that will be requited to undertake and complete these projects as described in Chapter N of the Plan and Section V of the Report; 7. Adoption and carrying out the Plan is economically sound and feasible in that eligible projects and activities will be funded by urban renewal tax revenues derived from a division of taxes pursuant to section 1c, Article IX of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 457.440 and other available funding as more fully described in the Section "Financial Analysis of the Plan"of the Report; 8. The City shall assume and complete any activities prescribed it by the Plan;and 9. The Agency consulted and conferred with affected overlapping taxing districts prior to the Plan being forwarded to the City Council. SECTION 2: The Tigard Urban Renewal Plan is hereby approved based upon review and consideration by the Tigard City Council of the Plan and Report, the Tigard Planning Commission Recommendation,each of which is hereby accepted,and the public testimony in the record. ORDINANCE No. 16- Z y Page 2 SECTION 3: The City Manager shall forward forthwith to the Agency a copy of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: The Agency shall thereafter cause a copy of the Plan to be recorded in the Records of Washington County,Oregon. SECTION 5: The City Manager,in accordance with ORS 457.115,shall publish notice of the adoption of the Ordinance approving the Plan,including the provisions of ORS 457.135,in the Tigard Times no later than four days following adoption of this Ordinance. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be effective upon certification by the County Elections Official that it has received voter approval at an election conducted on May 16,2017. PASSED: By Uh a-*iji Y104eLO�ote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this A—M—day of I eCdr'l/1 t er ,2016. Lj K Burgoyo,Deputy CWi RecbWer APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of IJe eAM 6er" ,2016. - �ADIA John . Cook,Mayor Approvedto form City Attorn Date ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 3 EXHIBIT A Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Adopted by the City of Tigard December 13,2016 Ordinance No. 16 - Approved by Voters [Date] If Amendments are made to the Plan,the Resolution or Ordinance Number and date will be listed here. The amendment will be incorporated into the Plan and noted through a footnote. Scrivner's Error: Correction to Councilor Woodard spelling LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Mayor John L. Cook City Council Jason Snider, Council President John Goodhouse Marland Henderson Marc Woodard Planning Commission: Calista Fitzgerald, President Brian Feeney,Vice President Michael Enloe, Alternate Y-Kang Hu Gary Jelinek Bret Lieuallen Brian McDowell Chris Middaugh Matthew Muldoon Tom Mooney, Alternate Don Schmidt City Manager Marty Wine City Attorney(Jordan Ramis PC) Dan Olsen and Shelby Rihala Community Development Director Kenny Asher Finance Director Toby LaFrance Senior Planner Susan P Shanks Associate Planner Cheryl Caines Project Planning Assistant Hannah Holloway Citizen Advisory Council John Boren Calista Fitzgerald John Goodhouse Scott Hancock Gary Jelinek Jim Long Cathy Olson Katen Patel Elise Shearer Veronica Smith David Walsh Dustin White Technical Advisory Committee Celina Baguiao,PCC Kelly Betteridge, TriMet Joshua Brooking, ODOT Buff Brown, City of Tigard Planning Cheryl Caines, City of Tigard Planning Rachael Duke, CPAH Lori Faha, City of Tigard Engineering Sean Farrelly, City of Tigard Community Development Cara Fitzpatrick, City of Tigard Finance Chris Ford,Metro Steve Kelley, Washington County Allen Kennedy, TVFR Kate Lyman, TriMet Alternate Mike McCarthy, City of Tigard Engineering Debi Mollahan,Tigard Chamber of Commerce David Moore, TTSD Carrie Pak, TVWD Jeffrey Raker,Metro Alternate Damon Reische, CWS Ryan Smith, TVWD Alternate Cassandra Ulven, TVFR Alternate Phil Wentz,TTSD Alternate Shannon Wilson, CPAH Alternate Jessica Woodruff, REACH Consultant Team Elaine Howard and Scott Vanden Bos of Elaine Howard Consulting, LLC Nick Popenuk of Tiberius Solutions,LLC Ali Danko and Rob Wyman of ECONorthwest Alex Dupey and Jon Pheanis of MIG, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEFINITIONS I IL INTRODUCTION 3 III. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 5 IV. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT CATEGORIES 9 V. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS 9 VI. PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION 13 VII. RELOCATION METHODS 14 VIII. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING OF PLAN 14 IX. AMENDMENTS TO PLAN 16 X. RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL OBJECTIVES 19 XI. APPENDIX A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION 28 I. DEFINITIONS "Agency"means the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency. This Agency is responsible for administration of the urban renewal plan. In Tigard,the Agency is the City Center Development Agency(CCDA). "Area"means the properties and rights-of-way located with the Tigard Triangle urban renewal boundary. "Blight" is defined in ORS 457.010(1)(A-E) and identified in the ordinance adopting the urban renewal plan. "Board of Commissioners"means the Washington County Board of Commissioners. "City"means the City of Tigard, Oregon. "City Council"or"Council"means the Tigard City Council. "Comprehensive Plan"means the Cite of Tigard comprehensive land use plan and its implementing ordinances,policies, and standards. "County"means Washington County, Oregon. "Fiscal year"means the year commencing on July 1 and closing on June 30. "Frozen base"means the total assessed value including all real,personal,manufactured, and utility values within an urban renewal area at the time of adoption. The county assessor certifies the assessed value after the adoption of an urban renewal plan. "Increment"means that part of the assessed value of a taxing district attributable to any increase in the assessed value of the property located in an urban renewal area, or portion thereof, over the assessed value specified in the certified statement. "Maximum indebtedness"means the amount of the principal of indebtedness included in a plan pursuant to ORS 457.190 and does not include indebtedness incurred to refund or refinance existing indebtedness. "ORS" means the Oregon revised statutes and specifically Chapter 457, which relates to urban renewal. "Planning Commission"means the Tigard Planning Commission. "Revenue sharing"means sharing tax increment proceeds as defined in ORS 457.470. "Tax increment financing(TIF)"means the funds that are associated with the division of taxes accomplished through the adoption of an urban renewal plan. "Tax increment revenues"means the funds allocated by the assessor to an urban renewal area due to increases in assessed value over the frozen base within the area. "Urban renewal area"means a blighted area included in an urban renewal plan or an area included in an urban renewal plan under ORS 457.160. "Urban renewal plan"or"Plan"means a plan, as it exists or is changed or modified from time to time, for one or more urban renewal areas, as provided in ORS 457.085,457.095, 457.105,457.115, 457.120, 457.125,457.135 and 457.220. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 1 "Urban renewal project"or"Project'means any work or undertaking carried out under ORS 457.170 in an urban renewal area. "Urban renewal report" or"Report" means the official report that accompanies the urban renewal plan pursuant to ORS 457.085(3). "Tigard Park System Master Plan" means the Park System Master Plan adopted by the Tigard City Council. "Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP)"means the Transportation System Plan adopted by the Tigard City Council. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 2 II. INTRODUCTION The Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan)was developed for the Tigard City Council (City Council)with cooperative input from a Citizen Advisory Council (CAC)and Technical Advisory Committee(TAC)that were formed for this purpose. The Plan also includes input from the community received at a public open house and several public meetings and hearings before the Planning Commission, City Council,and Washington County Board of Commissioners. Pursuant to the Tigard City Charter,this Plan will go into effect when it has been adopted by City Council and approved by Tigard voters at a public election. A. Plan Overview The Tigard Triangle is located in the northeast corner of the city. Its triangular shape is the result of the three state highways that surround it,namely OR 99W, OR 217, and Interstate 5. The long range land use and development vision for the Tigard Triangle is outlined in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and further defined in the recently completed Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan (TT Strategic Plan). The latter was developed with extensive public engagement and technical analysis in 2015. The TT Strategic Plan generally describes the desired scale and design of development for the Area. It also specifically identifies the need for pedestrian amenities,multimodal transportation improvements,public spaces, and certain kinds of uses, such as housing and neighborhood-scale goods and services. Additionally,the TT Strategic Plan identifies barriers to development and how they might be overcome through specific regulatory actions,public-private partnerships, and investment strategies. Urban renewal is listed as one such strategy because it has the ability to remove barriers to development and build projects that implement the vision by utilizing tax increment financing(TIF) as a source of funding. The purpose of this Plan,therefore, is to implement the land use and development vision for the Area and support its transformation into an active,urban,multimodal,and mixed-use district that is: • Attractive to new residents and businesses, • Connected to the city and the region, and • Built around its distinguishing natural features. The Plan Area, shown in Figure 1, consists of approximately 547.9 total acres: 383.04 acres of land in tax lots and 164.86 acres of public rights-of-way. It is anticipated that the Plan will take 35 years of tax increment collections to implement.The maximum amount of indebtedness (amount of TIF for projects and programs)that may be issued for the Plan is $188,000,000 (one hundred eighty-eight million dollars.) Detailed goals and objectives developed by the community for this Plan are intended to guide TIF investment in the Area over the life of the Plan. The project category descriptions and list of projects are similarly intended to aid future decision makers when considering how best to expend funds generated by TIF. The Plan is to be administered by the city's Urban Renewal Agency,which is currently the Tigard City Center Development Agency. Substantial amendments to the Plan must be approved by City Council as outlined in Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 3 Section 1X. All amendments to the Plan are to be listed numerically in this section of the Plan and then incorporated into the Plan document and noted by footnote Ax-ith an amendment number and adoption date. In summary,the Plan is designed to implement the goals and policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the vision of the TT Strategic Plan; advance the city's mission to become the most walkable city in the Pacific Northwest; and, support the area's designation as a regional Town Center. B. Urban Renewal Overview Urban renewal allows for the use of TIF,a financing source that is unique to urban renewal, to fund its projects. Tax increment revenues—the amount of property taxes generated by the increase in total assessed values in the urban renewal area from the time the urban renewal area is first established—are used to repay borrowed funds. The borrowed funds are used to pay for urban renewal projects and cannot exceed the maximum indebtedness amount set by the urban renewal plan. In general, urban renewal projects can include construction or improvement of streets, utilities,and other public facilities;assistance for rehabilitation or redevelopment of property; acquisition and re-sale of property (site assembly)from willing sellers; and improvements to public spaces. The purpose of urban renewal is to improve specific areas of a city that are poorly developed or underdeveloped,called blighted areas in ORS 457.These areas can have old or deteriorated buildings,public spaces that need improvements, streets and utilities in poor condition, a complete lack of streets and utilities altogether,or other obstacles to development. The Tigard Triangle meets the definition of blight due to its infrastructure deficiencies and number of vacant and underdeveloped lots. These blighted conditions are specifically cited in the ordinance adopting the Plan and described in detail in the accompanying Urban Renewal Report(Report). The Report accompanying the Plan contains the information required by ORS 457.085, including: • A description of the physical, social,and economic conditions in the area; • Expected impact of the Plan, including fiscal impact in light of increased services; • Reasons for selection of the Plan Area; • The relationship between each project to be undertaken and the existing conditions; • The estimated total cost of each project and the source of funds to pay such costs; • The estimated completion date of each project; • The estimated amount of funds required in the Area and the anticipated year in which the debt will be retired; • A financial analysis of the Plan; • A fiscal impact statement that estimates the impact of tax increment financing upon all entities levying taxes upon property in the urban renewal area; and • A relocation report. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 4 III. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The goals of the Plan represent its basic intents and purposes.Accompanying each goal are objectives,which generally describe how the Agency intends to achieve each goal. The urban renewal projects identified in Sections IV and V of the Plan are the specific means of meeting the objectives.The goals relate to adopted plans, as detailed in Section X, and were developed with input from the CAC and TAC. The goals and objectives will be pursued as economically as is feasible and at the discretion of the Agency. The goals and objectives are not listed in any order of importance or priority. Goal 1 –Encourage meaningful involvement by citizens, interested parties,and affected agencies throughout the life of the urban renewal district to ensure that it reflects the community's values and priorities. Objectives: 1. Invite citizens both within and outside of the boundaries of the Area, interested parties,and affected agencies to participate on urban renewal advisory committees and task forces. 2. Invite public comment at all Agency meetings. 3. Hold a public vote as required by the City Charter to use tax increment financing as a method of funding projects in the Area. Goal 2–Provide a safe and effective multimodal transportation network that provides access to,from,and within the Area and supports mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented development. Objectives: 1. Develop comfortable, interesting, and attractive streetscapes—especially along designated pedestrian streets--khat build upon the Area's existing assets, improve the pedestrian experience,and support a variety of commercial and social activities, e.g. cafe seating, outdoor displays,etc. 2. Create more connections within the Area by building new streets and trails so that people of all ages and abilities can enjoy healthy and interconnected lives. 3. Create more access points into and out of the Area by building new overpasses and/or undercrossings and modifying existing intersections and/or interchanges so that the Area is more connected to downtown Tigard, Portland Community College, and other neighboring areas and businesses. 4. Provide transportation choices for all modes of travel, as appropriate, and on-street parking and vegetative stormwater facilities,where feasible,when building new streets and extending and/or modifying existing streets, including but not limited to the following: a. Shared bicycle and vehicle travel lanes along low volume streets. b. Separate bicycle and vehicle travel lanes along high volume streets. c. Sidewalks and pedestrian crossings that connect to transit(e.g. bus) stops. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 5 5. Allow transitional street improvements(i.e. temporary or partial improvements)that further the Area's transportation goals and objectives and support small, incremental development when construction of all permanent street elements is not practicable at the time of development. 6. Provide a reliable transportation system that effectively manages vehicle congestion and safely moves people,goods,and services to,from, and through the Area,with special consideration for the following: a. Pedestrian crossings of high volume streets. b. Freight trucks to, from, and through the Area. c. Transit service(e.g. buses)to,from, and through the Area. 7. Build a multi-use trail for pedestrians and bicyclists along Red Rock Creek that provides an off-street east-west connection parallel to Highway 99W and facilitates the transformation of this natural corridor into a greenway. Identify and build other off-street multi-use trails and connections as opportunities arise. 8. Develop and implement a parking management plan for the Area that supports economic development efforts,the desired land use pattern,and a balanced transportation system, including but not limited to public-private partnerships,public parking facilities,and parking enforcement. 9. Periodically evaluate the functioning of the transportation system to refine project scope and inform project prioritization. Goal 3–Provide public utility improvements to support desired development. Objectives: 1. Develop a stormwater master plan for the Triangle and a greenway plan for Red Rock Creek. Build regional stormwater facilities where practicable. 2. Extend the public sewer system to areas served by private septic systems. 3. Permanently fix compromised sewer lines in Red Rock Creek. 4. Ensure new water mains are constructed as needed and coordinate replacement of existing water mains. 5. Encourage sustainable utility and energy usage practices. Goal 4–Create a clear identity for the Area as a fun and diverse place to live,work, shop,eat,and play by building upon existing unique and desirable features. Objectives: 1. Build public facilities that support the Area's identity as a mixed-use, multimodal, and pedestrian-oriented district, including but not.limited to parks, plazas,public restrooms,recreational facilities, and non-vehicular infrastructure, e.g. bike racks, bike lockers, pedestrian shelters, and wayfinding signage. 2. Use parks,trails, stormwater facilities, and existing natural features—such as wetlands, creeks,trees/tree groves, and view corridors—to create focal points that reinforce the Area's identity as a unique and special place. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 6 3. Apply distinctive and consistent sign, art, gateway, and streetscape treatments to visually distinguish the Area from surrounding areas. 4. Relocate or underground existing utilities as practicable to provide a more aesthetically pleasing pedestrian environment. Goal 5—Provide financial and technical assistance to new and existing businesses and housing developments that contribute to the Area's diversity and vitality and help it transform into a mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented district. Objectives: 1. Support new and existing businesses by providing a variety of financial and technical assistance programs that increase the diversity of goods and services available in the Area and/or contribute to the Area's liveliness and upkeep, including but not limited to fagade improvement grants, streetscape improvements, site preparation, permit fee assistance,private utility extensions/upgrades, and business development incentives. 2. Form public-private partnerships and use public investment in infrastructure and public spaces/facilities to spur private development. 3. Support the development of mixed-use buildings that provide a variety of housing types and storefront spaces for a range of community and commercial needs. 4. Assist in the development of affordable and workforce housing. 5. Assemble parcels to enhance development opportunities. 6. Encourage low impact and environmentally sustainable building practices wherever practicable. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 7 Figure 1 —Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Area Boundary Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area ■ F ' r ■ ■ i s ■ Nip ✓' i d ■ jir■rar■r+e■f�_f■■� �¢ � • ■ : ■ 1m :!JPH�� L�y I..- LID ■ ;•SW _ rij ■ ! ■ ■ f 11 f memo 0 Tigard Triangle URA yckgS ■ 0 500 1,000 feet Source:ECONorthwest Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 8 IV. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT CATEGORIES As an outcome of the goals described in the previous section,the projects within the Area fall into the following categories: • Transportation (Goal 2) • Public Utilities(Goal 3) • Public Spaces, Facilities, and Installations (Goal 4) • Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships (Goal 5) • Finance Fees and Plan Administration V. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS Urban renewal projects authorized by the Plan are described below. A. Transportation The following transportation projects are intended to provide a safe and effective multimodal transportation network in the Area that supports mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented development through improved internal connectivity, external access, and mobility; a variety-of travel options; comfortable, interesting, and attractive streetscapes; and,well-managed parking options. Table 1 —Transportation Projects Project Project Type Project Description Number I New Hwy 217 Overpass Extend Beveland Rd south over Hwy 217 to Hunziker (Beveland) Rd/Wall St area with car,ped,and bike facilities. 2 New Street Extend 74th Ave south from 99W to Hermoso Way or (74th Ave) Beveland Rd. 3 New Street Extend Atlanta St west from 69th Ave to Dartmouth St or (Atlanta) future 74th Ave. 4 New Hwy I-5 Overpass Provide ped/bike bridge across Hwy 1-5 from Beveland Rd (Beveland) to Southwood Dr. New Hwy I-5 Overpass Provide ped/bike bridge across Hwy 1-5 between the 5 (Red Rock Creek) Triangle and PCC Sylvania around location of Red Rock Creek. 6 Modified Intersection Install traffic signal and turn lanes where needed at Atlanta (Atlanta/68th) St/68th Ave intersection. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 9 Project Project Type Project I)escription Number 7 Modified Intersection Add protected left turn and transit improvements on 68th (99W/68th) Pkwy at 99W. Develop comfortable,interesting,and attractive streetscapes 8 Modified Streets throughout the Area,especially along designated pedestrian streets. 9 New Trail Build a new trail along Red Rock Creek parallel to and (Red Rock Creek) south of 99W. 10 New Streets Improve connectivity,circulation,and access throughout the Area with new or extended local streets. Modified Street TBD. Improve 72nd Ave corridor,including 11 (72nd Ave) intersections/interchanges.Dependent on 72nd Ave Corridor Study recommendations. Modified Street Implement access management strategies and median 12 (99W) projects in Hwy 99W Plan,including additional pedestrian crossing locations. 13 Modified Interchange Add second left turn lane on Hwy 217 northbound ramp to (99W/Hwy 217) 99W. 14 Modified Signals Upgrade signals throughout the Area with adaptive signal coordination technology. 15 Parking Management Plan Develop a plan and implement strategies for managing parking. Periodically evaluate the functioning of the transportation 16 Transportation Study system to refine project scope and inform project prioritization. B. Public Utilities The following public utility projects are intended to address infrastructure deficiencies in the Area.This list includes the development of a stormwater master plan for the Area and a greenway plan for Red Rock Creek that addresses stormwater, sewer, and recreational needs. It also includes construction of new stormwater facilities,repair of existing sewer lines, and extension or enlargement of existing water and sewer lines as needed to support desired development. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 10 Table 2—Public Utility Projects Project Project T%pe Project Description Number Develop a stormwater master plan for the Triangle and a 1 Stormwater/Sewer greenway plan for Red Rock Creek that addresses stormwater,sewer,and recreational needs. Construct approximately three regional stormwater facilities 2 Stormwater to meet new DEQ regulations for water quantity management. 3 Sewer Extend public sewer system to areas served by private septic systems. 4 Stormwater/Sewer Permanently fix compromised sewer lines in Red Rock Creek and restore creek channel and riparian buffer. 5 Water Install new water mains as needed. C. Public Spaces, Facilities, and Installations Projects within this category are intended to support the Area's new identity as a fun and diverse place to live and visit by building upon existing unique and desirable features. When considering whether to fund a specific project within this category,the Agency shall evaluate how it meets the goals and objectives of this Plan and whether it will encourage private investment in the Area and increase assessed value over time. The Agency shall also take the city's level of service standards for parks into consideration where applicable. Level of service standards are contained in the Tigard Park System Master Plan. Projects may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Parks, such as splash pads,nature play areas, skate parks, pocket parks, linear parks, and neighborhood parks • Greenways, such as along Red Rock Creek • Recreational facilities, such as those that serve the immediate needs of Area residents • Plazas • Public restrooms • Public art • Wayfinding • Gateway installations • District signage Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 11 As part of its evaluation,the Agency should consider consulting with the private development community to identify the kinds of amenities that would catalyze private sector development, particularly housing and mixed-use development. D. Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships Projects within this category are intended to contribute to the Area's diversity and vitality by providing assistance to new and existing businesses and housing developments.Projects include, but are not limited to,the following: • Fagade improvement grants/loans • Streetscape improvements • Technical,code,and/or fee assistance • Site assembly • Site clean-up/preparation • Site acquisition • Partnerships that facilitate housing and mixed use developments E. Finance Fees and Plan Administration This category allows for repayment of costs associated with implementation of the Plan, including but not limited to ongoing administration and financing costs associated with issuing long- and short-term debt, relocation costs, and other administrative costs. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 12 VI. PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION The Plan authorizes the acquisition and disposition of property as described in this section. Property includes any and all interests in property, including fee simple ownership, lease, easements,licenses, or other rights to use. If property is acquired it will be identified in the Plan through a Minor Amendment,as described in Section IX. Identification of property to be acquired and its anticipated disposition is required by ORS 457.085(g). A. Property acquisition for public improvements The Agency may acquire any property within the Area for the public improvement projects undertaken pursuant to the Plan by all legal means, including use of eminent domain. Good faith negotiations for such acquisitions must occur prior to institution of eminent domain procedures. B. Property acquisition from willing sellers The Plan authorizes Agency acquisition of any interest in property within the Area that the Agency finds is necessary for private redevelopment, but only in those cases where the property owner wishes to convey such interest to the Agency. The Plan does not authorize the Agency to use the power of eminent domain to acquire property from a private party to transfer property to another private party for private redevelopment. Property acquisition from willing sellers may be required to support development of projects within the Area. C. Land disposition The Agency will dispose of property acquired for a public improvement project by conveyance to the appropriate public agency responsible for the construction and/or maintenance of the public improvement. The Agency may retain such property during the construction of the public improvement. The Agency may dispose of property acquired under Subsection B of this Section VI by conveying any interest in property acquired. Property shall be conveyed at its fair reuse value. Fair reuse value is the value,whether expressed in terms of rental or capital price, at which the urban renewal agency, in its discretion,determines such land should be made available in order that it may be developed,redeveloped, cleared, conserved, or rehabilitated for the purposes specified in the Plan. Because fair reuse value reflects limitations on the use of the property to those purposes specified in the Plan,the value may be lower than the property's fair market value. Where land is sold or leased,the purchaser or lessee must agree to use the land for the purposes designated in the Plan and to begin and complete the building of its improvements within a period of time that the Agency determines is reasonable. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 13 VII. RELOCATION METHODS When the Agency acquires occupied property under the Plan, residential or commercial occupants of such property shall be offered relocation assistance, as required under applicable state law. Prior to such acquisition,the Agency shall adopt rules and regulations, as necessary, for the administration of relocation assistance.No specific acquisitions that would result in relocation benefits have been identified; however,there are plans to acquire land for infrastructure which may trigger relocation benefits in the future in the Area. VIII. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING OF PLAN Tax increment financing consists of using annual tax increment revenues to make payments on debt,usually in the form of bank loans or revenue bonds. The proceeds of the bonds are used to finance the urban renewal projects authorized in the Plan. Bonds may be either long-term or short-term. Tax increment revenues equal most of the annual property taxes imposed on the cumulative increase in assessed value within an urban renewal area over the total assessed value at the time an urban renewal plan is adopted. (Under current law,the property taxes for general obligation (GO)bonds and local option levies approved after October 6,2001 are not part of the tax increment revenues.) A. General description of the proposed financing methods The Plan will be financed using a combination of revenue sources. These include: • Tax increment revenues; • Advances, loans, grants, and any other form of financial assistance from federal, state, or local governments, or other public bodies; • Loans, grants, dedications, or other contributions from private developers and property owners, including, but not limited to, assessment districts; and • Any other public or private source. Revenues obtained by the Agency will be used to pay or repay the costs, expenses, advancements, and indebtedness incurred in(1)planning or undertaking project activities, or(2) otherwise exercising any of the powers granted by ORS Chapter 457 in connection with the implementation of this Plan. B. Tax increment financing and maximum indebtedness The Plan may be financed, in whole or in part,by tax increment revenues allocated to the Agency,as provided in ORS Chapter 457. The ad valorem taxes, if any, levied by a taxing district in which all or a portion of the Area is located, shall be divided as provided in Section 1 c, Article IX of the Oregon Constitution, and ORS 457.440. Amounts collected pursuant to ORS 457.440 shall be deposited into the unsegregated tax collections account and distributed to the Agency based upon the distribution schedule established under ORS 311.390. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 14 The maximum amount of indebtedness that may be issued or incurred under the Plan, based upon good faith estimates of the scope and costs of projects in the Plan and the schedule for their completion is $188,000,000 (one hundred and eighty-eight million dollars). This amount is the principal of such indebtedness and does not include interest or indebtedness incurred to refund or refinance existing indebtedness or interest earned on bond proceeds. It does include initial bond financing fees and interest earned on tax increment proceeds, separate from interest on bond proceeds. C. Plan Evaluation During the fifteenth (15th)year of the Plan,the Agency shall undertake a financial analysis of the Plan, including updated projections for tax increment finance revenues, and evaluate the ability of the Plan to achieve its maximum indebtedness by the anticipated expiration date in fiscal year 2052-53. The Agency shall consult and confer with affected taxing districts regarding the results of this financial update and will consider revenue sharing if revenues are exceeding projections. D.Plan Duration The Agency intends that it not collect tax increment revenues for the Area after FYE 2053. The Agency shall not initiate any urban renewal projects in the Area unless the Agency reasonably projects it will be able to pay for those projects from the proceeds of indebtedness issued on or before FYE 2053, and from other funds available to the Agency. Except as provided in the next sentence, all indebtedness that is secured by the tax increment revenues of the Area shall mature no later than FYE 2053, and the Agency shall structure all its indebtedness so that it can be paid in full from the tax increment revenues of the Area that the Agency reasonably projects it will receive on or before FYE 2053. The Agency may issue refunding indebtedness that matures after FYE 2053, only if issuing that refunding indebtedness is necessary to avoid a default on previously-issued indebtedness. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 15 IX. AMENDMENTS TO PLAN The Plan may be amended as described in this section. A. Substantial Amendments Substantial Amendments, in accordance with ORS 457.085(2)(i), shall require the same notice, hearing, and approval procedure required of the original Plan, under ORS 457.095, including public involvement,consultation with taxing districts,presentation to the Agency,the Planning Commission, and adoption by the City Council by non-emergency ordinance after a hearing. Notice of such hearing shall be provided to individuals or households within the City of Tigard, as required by ORS 457.120.Notice of adoption of a Substantial Amendment shall be provided in accordance with ORS 457.095 and 457.115. Substantial Amendments are amendments that: 1. Add land to the urban renewal area,except for an addition of land that totals not more than 1%of the existing area of the urban renewal area; or 2. Increase the maximum amount of indebtedness that can be issued or incurred under the Plan. B. Amendments Requiring Concurrence Amendments requiring written concurrence of taxing districts imposing at least 75%of the amount of taxes imposed under permanent rate limits in the urban renewal area are amendments that: 1. Increase the maximum amount of indebtedness that can be issued or incurred under the Plan. Increasing the maximum indebtedness is also a substantial amendment, as defined above and must also meet the requirements of Section IX (A)of this Plan. 2. Extend the duration provision as defined in Section VIII (D) of the Plan. In addition to obtaining concurrence, extending the duration of the Plan requires approval of the Agency and City Council by resolution. C. Minor Amendments Minor Amendments are amendments that are not Substantial Amendments as defined in ORS 457 or Amendments Requiring Concurrence as defined in this Plan. Minor Amendments require approval of the Agency by resolution. 'Unless otherwise permitted by state law,no land equal to more than 20 percent of the total land area of the original Plan shall be added to the urban renewal area by amendments,and the aggregate amount of all amendments increasing the maximum indebtedness may not exceed 20 percent of the Plan's initial maximum indebtedness,as adjusted,as provided by law. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 16 D. Amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan andlor Tigard Community Development Code Amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and/or Tigard Community Development Code that affect the Plan and/or the Area shall be incorporated automatically within the Plan without any separate action required by the Agency or City Council. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 17 Figure 2—Comprehensive Plan Designations Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area Comprehensive Plan Designations a.aaa ■aas • tiw ■ 'r seeps M spy e y i m . a e yb�gr Rd Comprehensive Plan �• '� i i General Commercial * � ° Professional Commercial Medium Density Residential Mixed Use Employment - Light I ndustria I ■ Tigard Triangle URA OWN Source:ECONorthwest Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 18 X. RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL OBJECTIVES ORS 457.085 requires that the Plan conform to local objectives.This section provides that analysis. Relevant local planning and development objectives are contained within the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18.500 Zoning Districts, Tigard Transportation System Plan, and Tigard Park System Master Plan. The following section describes the purpose and intent of these plans, the main applicable goals and policies within each plan, and an explanation of how the Plan relates to the applicable goals and policies. The numbering of the goals and policies within this section reflects the numbering that occurs in the original document.Italicized text is text that has been taken directly from an original document. Comprehensive Plan designations for all land in the Area are shown in Figure 2. All proposed land uses conform to Figure 2. Maximum densities and building requirements for all land in the Area are contained in the Tigard Community Development Code. A. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1: Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Policies: 3. The City shall establish special citizen advisory boards and committees to provide input to the City Council, Planning Commission, and City staff. 4. The City shall provide staff and financial support to the Committee for Citizen Involvement and any other appointed board or committee. 5. The opportunities for citizen involvement provided by the City shall be appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and shall involve a broad cross-section of the community. 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: 1. The City shall ensure pertinent information is readily accessible to the community and presented in such a manner that even technical information is easy to understand. 2. The City shall utilize such communication methods as mailings,posters, newsletters, the internet, and any other available media to promote citizen involvement and continue to evaluate the effectiveness of methods used. 3. The City shall work to maximize citizen involvement through education and accessibility. 4. The City shall ensure citizens receive a timely response from policy-makers regarding recommendations made through the citizen involvement program. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 19 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. 6. The City shall provide opportunities for citizens to communicate to Council, boards and commissions, and staff regarding issues that concern them. The Plan conforms to Citizen Involvement Goals 1.1 and 1.2, as a Citizen Advisory Council (CAC)was formed to help develop the Plan. The CAC included representatives from neighborhood organizations,the business and development community, and standing city advisory committees on land use,transportation, etc. They met four times to review the boundary, goals and objectives, finances, and draft Plan and Report. There was also an open house where citizens were given information on the proposed Plan and public meetings and hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council where citizens had the opportunity to comment on the proposed Plan. The Plan was voted on by the citizens of Tigard in May of 2017. Parks,Recreation,Trails,and Open Space Goal 8.1: Provide a wide variety of high quality park and open spaces for all residents, including both: A) developed areas with facilities for active recreation; and B) undeveloped areas for nature-oriented recreation and the protection and enhancement of valuable natural resources within the parks and open space system. Policies: 1. Tigard shall acquire, develop, and maintain a diverse system of parks, trails, open space, and recreational facilities that are safe,functional, and accessible to all of its population. 2. The City shall preserve, and where appropriate, acquire and improve natural areas located within a half mile of every Tigard resident to provide passive recreational opportunities. 3. The City shall seek to achieve or exceed the ideal park service level standard of 11.0 acres of parkland per thousand population. 4. The City shall endeavor to develop neighborhood parks[or neighborhood parkfacilities within other parks, such as a linear park]located within a half mile of every resident to provide access to active and passive recreation opportunities for residents of all ages. 5. The City shall develop other parks, including linear parks, special use facilities, urban plazas, skate parks, and pet arenas, consistent with the descriptions and standards contained in the park system master plan. 9. The City shall integrate green concepts into park and open space design, maintenance, and operations. 20. The City shall continue to improve access to neighborhood parks and other facilities in order to serve all citizens, regardless of ability. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 20 Goal 8.2: Create a Citywide network of interconnected on-and off-road pedestrian and bike trails. Policies: 1. The City shall create an interconnected regional and local system of on-and off-road trails and paths that link together neighborhoods,parks, open spaces, major urban activity centers, and regional recreational opportunities utilizing both public property and easements on private property. The Plan conforms to Parks, Recreation,Trails, and Open Space Goals 8.1 and 8.2, as there are projects in the Plan to develop plazas,parks, greenways, and public restrooms in the Area. There are also plans for the development of a trail system along Red Rock Creek parallel to and south of 99W. Economy Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy. Policies: 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. Goal 9.2: Make Tigard a center and incubator for innovative businesses, including those that focus on environmental sustainability. 1. The City shall institute appropriate land use regulations to accommodate a contemporary mix of economic activities. Goal 9.3: Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business. Policies: 1. The City shall focus a significant portion of future emplo}ment growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center (Downtown); Regional Center (Washington Square);High Capacity Transit Corridor(Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. 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. The Plan conforms to Economy Goals 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3, as there are projects in the Plan to provide financial and technical assistance to new and existing businesses and housing developments to help with the development of vacant and underutilized lands in the Area. Development assistance will include,but is not limited to, fagade improvement grantsiloans, streetscape improvements,technical assistance, site assembly, site clean-up/preparation, site acquisition, and/or partnerships that facilitate housing and mixed-use developments. The Plan was developed with the guidance of a Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of partners from various organizations including the Tigard Chamber of Commerce. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 21 Housin 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. 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. S. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square), and along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future. Goal 10.2:Maintain a high level of residential livability. 1. The City shall adopt measures to protect and enhance the quality and integrity of its residential neighborhoods. 2. The City shall provide multi-modal transportation access from residential neighborhoods transit stops, commercial services, employment, and other activity centers. S. The City shall encourage housing that supports sustainable development patterns by promoting the efficient use of land, conservation of natural resources, easy access to public transit and other efficient modes of transportation, easy access to services and parks, resource efficient design and construction, and the use of renewable energy resources. The Plan conforms to Housing Goals 10.1 and 10.2, as there are projects in the Plan to facilitate workforce and affordable housing and transit-oriented and mixed-use development. The Plan was developed with the guidance of a Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of partners from various organizations including Community Partners for Affordable Housing and REACH Community Development. Transportation Goal 12.1: Develop mutually supportive land use and transportation plans to enhance the livability of the community. 1. The City shall plan for a transportation system that meets current community needs and anticipated growth and development. 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. 3. The City shall maintain and enhance transportation functionality by emphasizing multi- modal travel options for all types of land uses. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 22 4. The City shall promote land uses in transportation investments that promote balanced transportation options. S. The City shall develop plans for major transportation corridors and provide appropriate land uses in and adjacent to those corridors. 6. The City shall support land use patterns that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preserve the function of the transportation system. 9. The City shall coordinate with private and public developers to provide access via a safe, efficient, and balanced transportation system. 10. The City shall require all development to meet the adopted transportation standards or provide appropriate mitigations. Goal 12.2: Develop and maintain a transportation system for the egcient movement of goods. 2. The City shall manage the transportation system to support desired economic development activities. 3. The City shall design streets to encourage a reduction in trip length by improving arterial, collector, and local street connections. 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. 6. The City shall develop and maintain an efficient arterial grid system that provides access within the City, and searched through traffic in the City. 9. The City shall require the provision of appropriate parking in balance with other transportation modes. 11. The City shall design the transportation system to provide connectivity between Metro designated centers, corridors, employment and industrial areas. Goal 12.3: Provide an accessible, multi-modal transportation system that meets the mobility needs of the community. 3. The City shall design and construct transportation facilities to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 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. S. The City shall develop and maintain neighborhood and local connections'to provide efficient circulation in and out of the neighborhoods. 6. The City shall require development adjacent to transit routes to provide direct pedestrian accessibility. 7. The City shall develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi- purpose nature of the street right-of-way. 8. The City shall design all projects on Tigard city streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 23 9. The City shall require sidewalks to be constructed in conjunction with private development and consistent with adopted plans. 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. 11. The City shall require appropriate access to bicycle and pedestrian facilities for all schools,parks,public facilities, and commercial areas. Goal 12.4:Maintain and improve transportation system safety. 1. The City shall consider the intended uses of street during the design to promote safety, efficiency, and multi-modal needs. 2. The City shall ordinate with appropriate agencies to provide safe, secure, connected, and desirable pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit facilities. 3. The City shall require new development to provide safe access for all modes to and from a publicly dedicated street. S. The City shall prioritize intersection improvements to address safety deficiencies. 9. The City shall require new transportation facilities to meet adopted lighting standards. Goal 12.6: Fund an equitable, balanced, and sustainable transportation system that promotes the well-being of the community. 2. The City shall seek to invest in capital projects that leverage other infrastructure investments. 3. The City shall seek opportunities for transportation investments that support transportation goals of efficiency, multi-modal access, and safety. The Plan conforms to Transportation Goals 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, and 12.4, as there are projects in the Plan to improve the transportation system for all modes of travel and to create better access to, from,and within the Area. The specific projects include modifying existing streets, constructing new streets,providing better pedestrian and bicycle access, intersection improvements, overpass connections, parking solutions for vehicles and bicycles,and trail development along Red Rock Creek. The Plan was developed with the guidance of a Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of partners from various agencies including Metro, TriMet, Washington County,and the Oregon Department of Transportation. B. Tigard Community Development Code The land uses in the Area will conform to the zoning designations in the community development code, including maximum densities and building requirements, and are incorporated by reference herein. The following zoning districts are present in the Area. C-G: General commercial district. The C-G zoning district applies to roughly half of the land in the Area. This zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a citywide and regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences that are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 24 storage, mini-warehouses,utilities, heliports, medical centers,major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. WE: Mixed-use employment. The MUE zoning district applies to roughly half of the land in the Area and is the city's only regional mixed-use employment district. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices,civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities,medical centers, schools,utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to: (1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible, and (2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. 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. C-P: Professional/administrative commercial district. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail, personal services, and restaurants in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Development in the C-P zoning district is intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. C. Tigard Transportation System Plan Goal 1: Land use and transportation coordination—develop mutually supportive land use and transportation plans to enhance the livability of the community. The city shall plan for a transportation system that meets current community needs and anticipated growth and development. Goal 2: Transportation efficiency—develop and maintain a transportation system for the efficient movement ofpeople and goods. Goal 3: Multi-modal transportation system—provide an accessible, multi-modal transportation system that meets the mobility needs of the community. Goal 4: Safe transportation system—maintain and improve transportation system safety. Goal 5:Inter-agency coordination—coordinate planning, development, operation and maintenance of the transportation system with appropriate agencies. Goal 6: Transportation funding—fund and equitable, balanced and sustainable transportation system that promotes the well-being of the community. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 25 in addition to the above applicable goals, the Tigard Triangle is identified as one of three special areas within the city with significant growth opportunities and transportation challenges. The Tigard Triangle is a priority opportunityfor community development and economic activity. The triangle has long been a retail and commercial hub within the city. Today, the triangle is zoned for commercial and mixed-use development and is identified as an area of significant future growth in housing and jobs. Although the area is bordered by three major regional roadways, in many ways those roadways function as barriers to access the triangle. Travel to and from the Tigard Triangle is funneled from Pacific Highway via 72nd Avenue, Dartmouth Street and 68th Parkway; the Highway 21 7172nd Avenue interchange; the northbound 1-5 interchange with Haines Street; and the southbound 1-5 interchange with Dartmouth Street. Access to and from the Tigard Triangle area is, and will remain, a critical issue to the success of the Tigard Triangle area. The majority of employees and customers traveling to the area on city streets access the Tigard Triangle area off of Pacific Highway. There is considerable congestion on Pacific Highway in the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle and this congestion is forecast to worsen with future development and regional growth. A second issue with the Tigard Triangle relates to non-auto mobilityicirculation todf om and within the area. The triangle area as a whole is generally sloping downward from Pacific Highway and 1-5 to Highway 217. The topography makes pedestrian and bicycle transportation more difficult. These conditions are worsened by incomplete bicycle and pedestrian systems within the Triangle. At the broadest level, options for improving access to the Tigard Triangle area fall into the following categories: • Provide additional intersection and roadway capacity improvements to improve traffic operations at the boundary streets. • Minimize additional roadway capacity infrastructure investment and focus on travel demand management(TDM)programs. • Provide better facilities for alternative modes (transit, bicycles,pedestrians, etc.). • Create a mix of critical additional capacity and implementing TDMprograms. The Plan conforms to the Transportation System Plan goals and recommendations, as there are projects in the Plan to improve the transportation system for all modes of travel and to create better access to, from,and within the Area. The specific projects include modifying existing streets, constructing new streets,providing better pedestrian and bicycle access, intersection improvements, overpass connections,parking solutions for vehicles and bicycles, and trail development along Red Rock Creek. The Plan was developed with the guidance of a Technical Advisory Committee, comprised of partners from various agencies including Metro, TriMet, Washington County, and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 26 A Tigard Park System Master Plan Goal 1:Provide a wide variety of high quality park and open spaces for all residents, including both: I) Developed areas with facilities for active recreation; and 2) Undeveloped areas for nature-oriented recreation and the protection and enhancement of valuable natural resources within the parks and open space system. Goal 2: Create a citywide network of interconnected on- and off-road pedestrian and bicycle trails. Goal 3:Provide Tigard residents with a broad range of recreational, cultural and educational activities. The Plan conforms to the Park System Master Plan, as there are projects in the Plan to develop plazas,parks, greenways,and public restrooms in the Area. There are also plans for the development of a trail system along Red Rock Creek parallel to and south of 99W. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 27 XI. APPENDIX A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area Tigard, Oregon Area=548 Acres A tract of land, including road rights-of-way, located in the Northeast One-Quarter, the Southeast One-Quarter, and the Southwest One-Quarter of Section 36, Township 1 South,Range 1 West and the Northwest One-Quarter,the Northeast One-Quarter, and the Southeast One-Quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian,City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 1 of the plat of"Villa Ridge No. 2",being on the Willamette Meridian,the easterly line of Washington County, in the Northeast One-Quarter of Section 31, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD): 1. Thence along the Willamette Meridian, being the easterly line of Washington County, Southerly 8,592 feet,more or less,to its intersection with the easterly extension of the south line of Lot 2 of the plat of"Salem Freeway Subdivision" (Assessor's Map 2S 1 01 DD); 2. Thence along said easterly extension, Westerly 585 feet,more or less,to the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217 (Assessor's Map 2S 1 O1 DD); 3. Thence along said southwesterly right-of-way line,Northwesterly 1,471 feet, more or less,to the west line of Lot 3 of the plat of"Varus Acres"(Assessor's Map 2S 1 OIDA); 4. Thence along said west line, Southerly 65 feet, more or less,to the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217, also being the north line of Lot 9 of the plat of"72nd Business Center" (Assessor's Map 2S 1 0IDA); 5. Thence along said southwesterly right-of-way line,Northwesterly 773 feet,more or less,to the easterly right-of-way line of SW 72nd Avenue(Assessor's Map 2S 1 O1DB); 6. Thence crossing SW 72nd Avenue,Northwesterly 258 feet,more or less,to the intersection of the westerly right-of-way line of SW 72nd Avenue and the southwesterly right-of-way line of SW Hunziker Street(Assessor's Map 2S 1 OIDB); 7. Thence along said southwesterly right-of-way line,Northwesterly 549 feet,more or less,to Engineers Station `H' 453+50, 80 feet right, as shown on Washington County Survey Number 25355 (Assessor's Map 2S 10 1 DB); 8. Thence Northwesterly 285 feet,more or less,to the intersection of the northeasterly right-of-way line of SW Hunziker Street and the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217 (Assessor's Map 2S 10 1 AC); 9. Thence along said southwesterly right-of-way line,Northwesterly 3,627 feet, more or less,to the intersection of the southeasterly right-of-way line of SW Pacific Highway and the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217 (Assessor's Map 2S 1 O1BB); 10. Thence crossing said SW Pacific Highway,Northwesterly 128 feet, more or less,to the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of SW Pacific Highway and the southwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217(Assessor's Map IS 1 36CC); 11. Thence crossing said State Highway 217 along the northeasterly extension of the northwesterly right-of-way line of SW Pacific Highway,Northeasterly 505 feet,more Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 28 or less,to the intersection of the northwesterly right-of-way line of SW Pacific Highway and the northeasterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217 (Assessor's Map IS 1 36CC); 12. Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line of State Highway 217, Northwesterly 155 feet, more or less,to the west line of Document Number 2016- 13886(Assessor's Map IS 1 36CC); 13. Thence along said west line,Northwesterly 727 feet,more or less,to the southerly right-of-way line of SW Pfaffle Street(Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36CC); 14. Thence along said southerly right-of-way line,Easterly 1,609 feet,more or less,to the southerly extension of the east line of Document Number 2016-18082(Assessor's Map IS 1 36CA); 15. Thence along said southerly extension and the east line thereof,Northerly ],113 feet, more or less,to the south line of the plat of"Tigard Woods, A Condominium Community" (Assessor's Map IS 1 36CA); 16. Thence along said south line,Easterly 296 feet, more or less, to the west line of the plat of"White Oak Village" (Assessor's Map IS 1 36CA); 17. Thence along said west line, Southerly 198 feet,more or less, to the north line of Tract`A' of said plat(Assessor's Map IS 1 36CA); 18. Thence along said north line,Easterly 4 feet, more or less,to the northeast corner thereof(Assessor's Map IS 1 36CA); 19. Thence along the east line of said Tract `A', Southeasterly 304 feet, more or less,to the northwest corner of Lot 26 of said plat(Assessor's Map 1 S l 36CA); 20. Thence along the west line of said Lot 26, Southerly 69 feet,more or less,to the southwest corner thereof(Assessor's Map I S 1 36CA); 21. Thence along the south line of said Lot 26 and the south line of Lot 27, Easterly 58 feet,more or less, to the southeast corner of said Lot 27 and the west line of Document Number 2001-29328 (Assessor's Map 1S 1361313); 22. Thence along the west line of said Deed, Southerly 65 feet,more or less,to the south line of said Deed (Assessor's Map IS 1 36DB); 23. Thence along said south line,Easterly 160 feet,more or less,to the west line of Document Number 2000-00576 (Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36DB); 24. Thence along said west line and the west line of Document Number 2007-115624, Northerly 319 feet, more or less,to the south line of Partition Plat Number 2009-027 (Assessor's Map 1S 1 36DB); 25. Thence along said south line,Easterly 192 feet,more or less,to the southeast corner thereof(Assessor's Map IS 1 36DB); 26. Thence along the east line of said plat,Northerly 100 feet,more or less, to the south line of Document Number 2000-14791 (Assessor's Map IS 1361313); 27. Thence along said south line,Easterly 21 feet, more or less,to the west line of Document Number 2001-49756(Assessor's Map IS 1 36DB); 28. Thence along said west line,Northerly 451 feet,more or less,to the south line of the plat of"Metzger Acre Tracts"(Assessor's Map l S l 36AC); 29. Thence along said south line,Easterly 34 feet,more or less,to the west line of Document Number 2001-49756(Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36AC); 30. Thence along said west line,Northerly 126 feet,more or less,to the southerly rightof- way Iine of SW Spruce Street(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AC); Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 29 31. Thence along said southerly right-of-way line and the easterly extension thereof, Easterly 769 feet,more or less,to the easterly right-of-way line of SW 71 st Avenue (Assessor's Map 1S 1 36AD); 32. Thence along said easterly right-of-way line,Northerly 58 feet,more or less,to the north line of Document Number 2016-75996 (Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36AD); 33. Thence along said north line, Easterly 380 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Document Number 2016-64828(Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36AD); 34. Thence along the north line of said Deed and the northeasterly extension thereof, Northeasterly 258 feet,more or less,to the easterly right-of-way line of SW 69th Avenue(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD); 35. Thence along said easterly right-of-way line,Northerly 189 feet, more or less,to the south line of Document Number 2005-78796,being a line parallel to and 88 feet southerly of the north line of Lot 1,Block 1 of the plat of"Villa Ridge"(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD); 36. Thence along said parallel line,Easterly 190 feet,more or less,to the west line of Document Number 2008-19233 (Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36AD); 37. Thence along said west line,Northerly 88 feet,more or less,to the northwest corner thereof(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD); 38. Thence along the north line of said Deed and the north line of Document Number 2008-74471,Northeasterly 416 feet, more or less,to the west line of Document Number 85-51861 (Assessor's Map 1 S 1 36AD); 39. Thence along said west line, Southerly 110 feet,more or less,to the southwest corner of said Deed(Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD); 40. Thence along the south line of said Deed and the south line of Deed Book 794, Page 602,Northeasterly 179 feet,more or less,to the west line of Document Number 93- 07010 (Assessor's Map IS 1 36AD); 41. Thence along said west line,Northerly 249 feet,more or less,to the south line of the plat of"Villa Ridge No. 2"(Assessor's Map 1S 1 36AD); 42. Thence along said south line.Northeasterl) 194 feet,more or less,to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 548 acres,more or less. 10/17/2016 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON JMIIJARY 12, 2016 MCHAEL L KALNA SMPLS 5/30/17 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 30 STET 1 OF 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON POINT OF BEMNING SE CORNER LOT 1. IF ®a J N�M DIM TOTAL AKA — 50 ® ® d ® to W NOT TO �J Z SCALE 112 10 17 2016 REG�ISgURREDD LAR0L1 SURVEYOR TIGARD TRIANGLE DMT URBAN RENEWAL AREA B REGON PREPARED FOR DOW= & FORESTRY. LLC �AX4U 12, 20u CITY OF TVZ 12965 SW HO W RD, STE 100 MICHAEL S. KAUMA OM 13125 SW HALL BLVD TUALATIN. OR 97062 AKS JOB. TIGARD. OR 97113 P-503LU6151 F:503.563.6152 aka--en cam 5570 u�c ssm cor ua�I a Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 31 907 2 OF 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON POINT OF BEGINNING SE CORNER LOT 1, 9 .� � i PLAT OF"►LAA RIDGE NO. f Q Y 142-NOR Y 1 't LOT 1 = LOT 11 LOT 6 I-- too ON. 3-8177 ' ; cn Rte'—p cd 3740THERLY 88't 51861 SW PINE ST � ',� `� N DOC. NO. DN. 005- 0 2009- 0N. 19233 2008- _35-NORTHERLY el ac 1 136-}15TFRLY 74471 N�GNW py � 189'f MERIDIAN , SEE SHEET 03 10 17/2016 SCALE 1" - 200 FEET REGISTERED LAID WIR >'00 0 rf0 1PA 100 E00 ,/`�__"4�_ TIGARD TRIANGLE E1aEXHIBIT�" URBAN RENEWAL AREA 8 oRc oN PREPARED FOR AM ENGN.IMG & FORESTRY, LLCSI< MICHAEL CITY OF TM 12965 SW HERMAN RD, STE 100 aacr} 13125 SMI HALL BLVD TUALATIN. OR 97062 AM ROM 5 . OR 97223 P:503.563.6151 F:503.563.6152 dm- .00m 5570 W WD CDT un-M 102 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 32 ShU7 3 LIQ'9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SEE SHEET 02 N WWW® Q 1— N SCALE 1" — 1000 FEED W t000 o 41mmem000 10/17/2016 SE � — 04 REUM71MED �� PROFEMONAL LAND SURVEYOR TIGARD TRIANGLE E*07 URBAN RENEWAL AREA B RED2. PREPARED FOR AKS MGMG & FORESTRY, LLC oma. W Ism mom L�� C" OF �A 12965 SW HERMAN RD, SM 100AKR 13125 SN HALL BLVD TUAUDN, OR 97062 AKS JOB: , CR 97223 P:503.5U6151 F:503.563.6152 oks-on .com 5570 M W70 cor ue-oa 13 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 33 AU7 4 LIQ 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SEM s m 05 SEE SHEET 03 4—SOUTHERLY 65't LOT 9 u} W N NAWs ti� I Lu ' 9a LOT 3 i CM3, SCALE 1" 200 FEET zoo o so tzo IN wo LOT 2 1012016 U&FRTWr REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LOT 3 2-11fr t_Y 585'± TIGARDTRIANGLE DMIT URBAN RENEWAL AREA B OREGON PREPARED FOR AKS ENgNEai NG &FORESTRY, LLC MAIRIA L S. 2016 CITY OF TIGARD 12965 SW HERMAN RD, STE 100 AKIR O� MK2NEL S KAI 13125 SW HALL BLVD AKS JOB: RKENM TOM TUALATIN, OR 97062 OR 9= P:503.563.6151 P.5U563.6152 oke—en .com A 5510 M x70 CDT w+-ox 104 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 34 STET 5 Gly 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SEE SHEET 06 SCALE 1" = 200 FEET 8- NORTHWESTERLY 285'f POO o BO IPO m mo 'H'STA 453+50, W RIGHT (AS SHOWN ON SN 25355) DOC. ft 2006-1111110 . uum LOT 1 SW VARNS ST 5-NORTfE>�Y n3't 6-NORIHWESTERI Y W f Q LOT 12 LOT 11 v SW VARNS ST 7m 6r tStl W 6>9M' 72016 V31 4-SOUTHERLY Wf 3471'± IWESIFRLY 10 LOT 9 1,471't REGISTERED STT SEE SHEET 04 b TIGARD TRIANGLE DMIT URBAN RENEWAL AREA B JANUOREARY O2. 2016 PREPARED FOR An EMMEE MIG & FORESTRY, LLC IR KV1 S KAUiA aTY OF TOM 12%5 SW HERMAN RD. STE 100 0� 13125 SW HALL BLVD W"TIN, OR 97062 AKS Joy MEW&6/30/17 11GW. OR 97223 P:503. U6151 F:503.563.6152 can 5570 ms 5570 mr W-m 105 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 35 SWT 6 GIS 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SEE SLEET 07 SCALE 1" - 2DO FEET 200 0 e0 no no 200 Syy y DOC. Na 97-26693 AST � s-Norrn�wes�wxr 285'1 10 72016 41' STA 453+50. 80' RIGHT REGISTERED (AS SIXIN ON SN 2=) PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR 7-NWHME Y 549'1 SEE SHEET 05 TIGARD TRIANGLE E XHUT URBAN RENEWAL AREA B OREGON ROARED FOR ARS ENGINEERING & FORESTRY. LLC IOpIwlin S KA1SiA CIT` T1GAR0 12965 SLY HERMAN RD, SLE 100 mq 13125 SnLI HALL BLVD TUALATIN. OR 97062 me A& NEOMMM om. OR 97223 P:503.5616151 F.503.5616152 oks-sN.00m 5570 DM?55A COT"106 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 36 .9&77OF9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON U E3-j SW PFAFFLE ST SEE sNOEr as L 1� r 14--WTERLY 1,609'f 15-NORTHERLY DOC. NO. r 17i�T 8134071 y ��, ��•� SCALE 1" = 600 FEET 5m 9 200300400600 01y r � IV< �� ay 10/17/2016 REGISI ED LAND SURVEYOR SEE SHEET 06 TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL AREA B OREGON PREPARED FOR AKS Daum& FORESTRY, LLC 16 NENAEL 12.KA aTY OF Ti6ARD 12965 SW HERMAN RD, STE 100 13125 SW HALL BLVD TUALATIN. OR 97062AKS TWO, OR 97223 P;503.563.6151 F.503.563.6152 aks-en can 5570 M SSA COT W-V 107 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 37 W7'B OF 9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W.M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SEE sty 09 %W NIM A UJI 16-EASTERLY r N 296'# 2000-14791 Fp MR 18-EASTERLY 2W9-027 27-EASTERLY 4't w�-��+ � $ 21'1 19-VEASTEI ar26-N}'ERt Y w .M 25-EASTERLY DOC. NO. , 1924 , 81-34071 TR .A r 2D-SOUTHGV± DOG NO. DOC. , 21-EASTEFLY - N0. 5 �- B't EASIERL.Y 22-SOUTHERLY 160'1 65'1 DOc. NO. y�Q a1-34071 � 14-EASTERLY 1609 t 10/17/M6 �' SCALE 1" = 200 FEET REGISTERED �C PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR �' D MIM200 TIGARD TRIANGLE EXHIBIT URBAN RENEWAL AREA B y11RMR1E 17. 2016 PREPARED FOR AKS E OMMG h FORESTRY. LLC YICRAa S KAtJ QTY OF WARD 12965 SW HERMAN RD, STE 100 a 13125 SW HALL BLVD RMATIN, OR 97062 AKS` ; TIGARD, OR 97223 P:W3-63.6151 F:503.563.6152 oks- .com 5570 M 5M COT uR—oe C8 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 38 S7>m 9 GIS"9 MAP OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA A TRACT OF LAND, INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY, LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4, THE SE 1/4, AND THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 36, T1 S, R1 W, AND THE NW 1/4, THE NE 1/4, AND THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 1, T2S, R1 W, W,M., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON W LU Q a F— N N ( 34—NOR1HEASTEI.RY ' 2VI: DOC N0. NO. I 2001-49756 DOC. NO. 96-25810 2012-64255 Y SW SPRUCE ST 33—EASTETSLY 38O'# [0-0 ) # 1 t 31--EASTERLY 766 32—NMTHMY 599 SOUTH LIME OF DOC N0. 7ET11,^fR ACRE 1R4C1S' 2016-75896 29—EASTERLY X± m aG,�`G qktfl NO. 97-085245 SEF SHEET 06 10 17 016 SCALE 1' - 200 PTET P"SMFESSIONAL LAND BU MOR 200 0 M 1!0 360000 TIGARD TRIANGLE EJ W URBAN RENEWAL AREA B OREGON PREPARED FOR AKS EWNEEMG A FORESTRY, LLC TISK JANIIW 12. 2016 CITY OF TOM 12965 SW HERMM RD, STE 100 anm NCHAEL S. KAUNA 13125 SW HALL BLVD TUALATIN, OR 97062 AKS JOB: TWW, OR 97223 P:503-9616151 F:503.563.6152 alts—en comAAMI- 5570 M 5570 COT LR-o+109 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 39 EXHIBIT B Report Accompanying the Urban Renewal Plan Adopted by the City of Tigard December 13,2016 Ordinance No. 16 - Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area Consultant Team Elaine Howard Consulting,LLC Elaine Howard Scott Vanden Bos Tiberius Solutions LLC Nick Popenuk Rob Wyman ECONorthwest Kate Macfarlane TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 II. EXISTING PHYSICAL, SOCIAL,AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS ON MUNICIPAL SERVICES..........................................................................3 III. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF EACH URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE PLAN.................................................................................................................................21 IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA..................................21 V. THE ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF EACH PROJECT AND THE SOURCES OF MONEYS TO PAY SUCH COSTS..................................................................................25 VI. THE ANTICIPATED COMPLETION DATE FOR EACH PROJECT...........................28 VII. THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES REQUIRED AND THE ANTICIPATED YEAR IN WHICH INDEBTEDNESS WILL BE RETIRED...........................................................................................................................3 3 VIII. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN.......................................................................38 IX. IMPACT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.................................................. ..40 X. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY LIMITS ON ASSESSED VALUE AND SIZE OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA.......................................................................................44 XI. RELOCATION REPORT..................................................................................................44 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area I. INTRODUCTION The Report on the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan(Report)contains background information and project details that pertain to the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan). The Report is not a legal part of the Plan, but is intended to provide public information and support the findings made by the City Council as part of the approval of the Plan. The Report provides the analysis required to meet the standards of ORS 457.085(3), including financial feasibility. The format of the Report is based on this statute. The Report documents the existing conditions in the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area(Area), shown on Figure 1, as they relate to the proposed projects in the Plan. The Report provides guidance on how the urban renewal plan might be implemented.As the Tigard City Center Development Agency(Agency)reviews revenues and potential projects each year, it has the authority to make adjustments to the implementation assumptions in this Report. The Agency-may allocate budgets differently, adjust the timing of the projects, decide to incur debt at different timeframes than projected in this Report,and make other changes as allowed in the amendments section of the Plan. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 1 Figure 1 —Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Area Boundary Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area a st . a r i .r sip, ■ Ju 8 ■ ju - Ei ■ SW . n blcer Rd#0 eie icy _ �J . !> ■ V. dim a no ■ ■ Tigard Triangle URA '►• ?�j : vv�� . ■ 0 500 1,000 feet I I i i : ; y91,110 Source:ECONorthvmt Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 2 II. EXISTING PHYSICAL, SOCIAL, AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS ON MUNICIPAL SERVICES This section of the Report describes existing conditions within the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area and documents the occurrence of"blighted areas," as defined by ORS 457.010(1). A. Physical Conditions 1. Land Use The Area measures 547.9 total acres in size, encompassing 383.04 acres included in 327 individual parcels, and an additional 164.86 acres in public rights-of-way. An analysis of FYE 2016 property classification data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation database was used to determine the land use designation of parcels in the Area. By acreage, commercial accounts for the largest land use within the area(83%). This is followed by vacant(9%), and exempt(6%). The total land uses in the Area, by acreage and number of parcels, are shown in Table 1. Table 1 —Existing Land Uses in Area Commercial 263 321.15 83.841% Vacant 41 35.08 9.16% Exempt 18 21.82 5.70% Multi-Family Residential 5 4.99 1.30% Total 327 383.04 100% Source:Compiled by Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 3 2. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the Area are the same. As illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 2,the majority(52%) of the Area by acreage is zoned and designated in the comprehensive plan as General Commercial. The second most prevalent zoning and comprehensive plan designation is Mixed-Use Employment,representing 45%of the Area. There are two lots that are split zoned/designated. The data uses the most prevalent category. Table 2—Existing Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations in Area Zoning/Comprehensive Plan 'Vo Total Parcels Acres Designation Acres General Commercial 113 200.98 52.47% Mixed Use Employment 204 173.54 45.31% Medium Density Residential 1 5.77 1.51% Professional Commercial 9 2.75 0.72% Total 327 383.04 100.00% Source:Compiled b}-Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 4 Figure 2—Area Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations �F ODA ti 'Q • CA ■ Sh' � ya�For Rd Zoning ■ General Commercial �:•*•• Professional Commercial 0 4� Mixed Use Employment fed`• �laj� v • Medium Density Residential(R-12) ++►� ,, Light Industrial -r ■ ■ Tigard Triangle URA 0 500 1,000 1,500 feet I I I Source:ECONorthwest with data frorn the City of Tigard and Metro RLIS 2016 Q1 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 5 B. Infrastructure This section identifies the existing conditions in the Area to assist in establishing blight. There are projects listed in several City of Tigard infrastructure master plans and the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan that relate to these existing conditions. This does not mean that all of these projects are included in the Plan. The specific projects that are included in the Plan are listed in Sections IV and V of this Report. 1. Transportation The Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) details the transportation needs within the Area. Streets and Intersections There are significant transportation needs within the Area: "The Tigard Triangle is a priority opportunity for community development and economic activity. The triangle has long been a retail and commercial hub within the city. Today,the triangle is zoned for commercial and mixed-use development and is identified as an area of significant future growth in housing and jobs. Although the area is bordered by three major regional roadways, in many ways those roadways function as barriers to access the triangle. Travel to and from the Tigard Triangle is funneled from Pacific Highway via 72nd Avenue,Dartmouth Street and 68th Parkway;the Highway 217/72nd Avenue interchange; the northbound 1-5 interchange with Haines Street; and the southbound I-5 interchange with Dartmouth Street. Access to and from the Tigard Triangle area is,and will remain, a critical issue to the success of the Tigard Triangle area.The majority of employees and customers traveling to the area on city streets access the Tigard Triangle area off of Pacific Highway. There is considerable congestion on Pacific Highway in the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle and this congestion is forecast to worsen with future development and regional growth. A second issue with the Tigard Triangle relates to non-auto mobility/circulation to/from and within the area.The triangle area as a whole is generally sloping downward from Pacific Highway and 1-5 to Highway 217. The topography makes pedestrian and bicycle transportation more difficult. These conditions are worsened by incomplete bicycle and pedestrian systems within the Triangle. At the broadest level, options for improving access to the Tigard Triangle area fall into the following categories: • Provide additional intersection and roadway capacity improvements to improve traffic operations at the boundary streets. • Minimize additional roadway capacity infrastructure investment and focus on travel demand management(TDM)programs. • Provide better facilities for alternative modes(transit, bicycles,pedestrians,etc.). • Create a mix of critical additional capacity and implementing TDM programs."1 ' Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan,November 23, 1010,p.5.73 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 6 Infrastructure Investments As identified in the Tigard TSP: "Within the Triangle,the improvement projects include several capacity enhancements to existing roadways, extension of Atlanta Street to connect 68th Avenue and Dartmouth, and a new Highway 217 overcrossing connecting Hunziker Street to Hampton Street. The Atlanta Street extension and Hunziker Street overcrossing would provide needed additional circulation options for auto and non-auto modes of transportation within the Tigard Triangle. In addition,the Hunziker Street overcrossing would provide an additional access to the Tigard Triangle area from the south and west. The plan also includes widening 72nd Avenue (arterial)and Dartmouth Street(collector)to five lanes. Without careful design of both facilities,these could end up functioning as a surrogate for I-5 travel and could become significant pedestrian and bicycle barriers within the Tigard Triangle.An initial step toward realizing these projects is a corridor study to review street cross sections and potential parallel routes."2 Specific project considerations from the TSP for the Area are listed in Table 3 on the following page. 2 Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan,November 23, 1010,p.5.74 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 7 Table 3—Transportation Project Needs as Identified in the Tigard TSP Name I)escription Time Cost Frame Estimate OR 217/72nd Avenue Complete interchange reconstruction with Near-term $19,500,000 Interchange improvements additional ramps and overcrossings Atlanta Street extension Extend Atlanta Street west to Dartmouth Street Mid-term $3,300,000 68th Avenue Widen to 2/3 lanes between Dartmouth Mlid-term $10,000,000 Street/1-5 Ramps and south end 72nd Avenue widening: Widen to 4,'5 lanes Mid-term $8,000,000 ORE 99W to Dartmouth 72nd Avenue widening: Widen to 4/5 lanes,including bridge Mid-term $7,000,000 Dartmouth to Hunziker Complete 4/5-lane section from Costco to Dartmouth Street widening 72nd Avenue(small section missing in Near-term $320,000 eastbound direction only) Dartmouth Street widening Widen to 4 lanes plus tum lanes and sidewalks Near-term $3,000,000 between 72nd Avenue and 1-5 (68th Avenue) 68th/Atlanta/Haines Traffic signal and turn lanes where necessary Near-term $500,000 68th AveiDartmouth Street Install traffic signal and turn lanes where Near-term $500,000 necessary 72nd Ave/Dartmouth Street Traffic signal and intersection widening Near-term $1,100,000 Intersection improvements such as dual Pacific Hwy/1-5 SB northbound through lanes on pacific highway Near-term $5,000,000 and dual lanes for 1-5 ramps to reduce confusion,congestion and related accidents Pacific Hwy/68th Ave Intersection improvements such as added turn Near-term $1,000,000 lanes,protected left-turns at 68th Pacific Hwy/72nd Ave Intersection improvements such as added turn Near-term $2,000,000 lanes,a southbound right turn pocket Pacific Hwy/Dartmouth St Intersection improvements such as turn lanes Near-term $6,000,000 and auxiliary lanes Source:City of Tigard Transportation System Plan Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 8 2. Water Water is provided by the Tualatin Valley Water District(TVWD). The TV" Capital Improvement Plan for the adopted 2015-17 budget lists one specific project in the Tigard Triangle Area.3 In general, improvements, such as replacement of aging infrastructure, are anticipated throughout the entire TVWD service area. The one specific project in the Area is an upgrade to the Metzger North-South Transmission Line. TVWD needs to make various fire flow improvements based on their recent 2014 Master Plan.The project will provide a resiliency function to Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue facilities and a key commercial area. It is estimated to include the installation of 6,000 feet of 18"transmission line. The area being served, which includes the Area and properties north of the Area in Metzger, expects further growth and development in future years a 3. Stormwater The city maintains the stormwater system in the Area. There are two concentrations of stormwater mains with the Area, including one in the vicinity of SW Dartmouth Street/SW Clinton Street/SW 68th Avenue/SW 69th Avenue and another at the southern corner of the Area. Although there are no identified improvement projects for the Area in capital improvement plans, future development will need to consider stormwater improvements. The majority of stormwater runoff from the Area drains into Red Rock Creek. This runoff scours the creek bed and undermines the sanitary sewer line located in the stream corridor. More information concerning the blighting conditions concerning stormwater are detailed in a memo from the City Engineer as follows: "The city does not currently have a Stormwater Master Plan but is in the process of developing one, scheduled for completion summer of 2017. Initial work on the plan has included an identification of known issues, which are shown on the attached maps, Exhibits B and C respectively. [See Figures 3 and 4.1 Issues are grouped into one of four categories, namely water quality, flooding, erosion, and maintainability. As the two maps show, issues in the Tigard Triangle are centered around Red Rock Creek, which serves as the main stormwater conveyance corridor for the area. In addition to the known issues discussed above,the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)recently issued a new National Pollution Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) permit to Clean Water Services for storm water and sanitary sewer/treatment systems. The City of Tigard is a co-implementer of these permit requirements within city limits. As a result of the new permit,the city expects that the Stormwater Master Plan will need to include identification of capital projects and design standards that provide additional water quantity management throughout areas of the city, including the Triangle.The city currently plans to consider a regional approach to stormwater management in this area, similar to the approach used in River Terrace,which will require the acquisition of land or easements and construction of detention ponds and conveyance infrastructure. For the purposes of this 3 Tualatin Water District CIP Overview 2015-17 Budget,Section 17 4 Tualatin Valley Water District Adopted Capital Improvement Plan 2015-17,pg. 17-35 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 9 memo,the city will assume that at least three regional detention ponds will be needed in the Triangle area."5 5 Memo Re:Existing Conditions in Tigard Triangle: Sewer and Stormwater,August 8,2016 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 10 Figure 3 —Stonnw•ater Issues Stormwater Kno " j DRAFY Exhibit B Liiiisom Map !04ri16+ a/ .t �. rs+•'a. ! y . t 1 �r+.ls /I *��' A ^ 1' } 'isw •/ wf .,.1t.. • . a7•w •• 4 t �.. rte + wl.r ! �.. � (��■ +n AM'ML 12 •1 1 a+...._._. Q■ r�was s ...q+. fw i.■■r ..r_ y«'�_...� .. r �,, ... j •.:«.'aj tie. .�,� .. �, . *•R •�. •• I Pus ■ ,w ;;� !•. 6 i ',R R QTY` r..,• 3 �,f,•` rise STORMWQTER iii��1 • ''t /� Mi!'TE•4LA11 oot....Lee. � f �' +:c •�"sem ...... �� � � �•'�.,.,.� • J am I e i v r N'BE Llrt rM■+r■A tare ar Buffe"a 81ern1■■1.r Quart BMeer■■I.r 8eab o YYbeu Or+ft fe•o•Poled a Rwilko isrw Pane ® ErsNerr iw■w PafM o rbbftrn=Mq rww PeIM .....� i....+StudyAr■■ t 8brn■■I.r vwe ien■..w f]•rnrtm Plp• Wase nwrtgr b•■•Ar■a — FMaA,O law tir — Ea•bn b■rw Lbw efrbre.rnbwey law.lkr ..•-- 7Y■a Owd O nw■1•r Crdnre 8bn■NMwWMKOuft M* FbaBg km Area M 8re■bn law Ar•■ MR W1 nbflb kao Ana w 86■■rn — sk. moo M■en aNwiv wWN•r Orley Peed 0•b 7/2120163A130PM Source:City of Tigard memo on conditions 8/2016,Exhibit B Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 11 Figure 4—Storrnwater Issues Stormn-ater Known lsj W [ZRAFT Exhibit C771 LOCOM Map --46 7 00 11 12 110 is 17 141 X STORMW&TER I : a � ; *I. I It, � WASM PLAN 99 J -W -OWN AN, ONAW!!, 5 4r L JA 3FW 9 WO 1,0:.13 Logond r""2"m.1T%WdCKV1M.W., - OWO 9W..M,9.1. 0 MAK QUAY hmn PoW • Mndkv hmn Nird 0 Embn how PaM 0 VO&MIMINNY Man PON h1vi ;6§19;"*Ana M 8twmwvbrV&A M Smmmw Deftoon F" NAM QAMft1MWA= Fbodh Awa UO — FjoMm"a Lim IN I-w,M4"a LM Taft Mormwasercuwa — 8W1.WdKvftWaWftPvM MMOVIMN AM@ M FJOWm Wow AM II NO b M11 MM Afes DOIL 7!21120163M:3 PM Source:City of Tigard memo on conditions 8.2016.Exhibit C Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 12 4. Sanitary Sewer The city maintains the sanitary sewer system in the Area. Although there are no projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan,there is acknowledgement that there are sanitary sewer needs in the Area. These needs have been documented in a memo from the City Engineer as follows: "There are two areas in the Tigard Triangle that are not currently served by the public sewer system. These areas contain single-family residential uses on private septic systems that pre- date the area's current zoning. Redevelopment of these areas would likely trigger the requirement to extend the nearby sewer mains and connect to the public sewer system. The city's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan does not identify these as capital sewer projects because they are generally considered the responsibility of the property owner(s). One of the unsewered areas is around 69th Avenue north of Dartmouth, and the other area is around Elmhurst Street east of 72nd Avenue. In addition to these unsewered areas,there is an existing sewer main that runs the length of Red Rock Creek corridor in the Tigard Triangle. This main has had two breaks in the recent past that have been caused by erosive storm water flows that have undercut the ground around the main. The city has completed emergency repairs but a permanent fix remains unfunded."6 Figures 3 and 4 on the previous pages show where the sewer line in Red Rock Creek has been compromised. Line 5201 identifies the general area of erosion, and Points 5106 and 5107 identify the location of the two breaks and subsequent repairs. Figure 5 on the following page shows the areas that are currently not served by the public sewer system. 6 Memo Re:Existing Conditions in Tigard Triangle:Sewer and Stormwater,August 8,2016 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 13 Figure 5—Sanitary Sewer Deficiencies tXNBIT A:Tigard ATLANTA S" TrimVeSaws !r N� aYin. �+� • � i � � _—__;•�xdYi-�R>fS 7 � Ams a G IP irdNsr"-� ri iN;c•N y ►- a t Unsewered Areas 1 049100l'wws7, yK •x{ ; a ll 1._ fir,, 11A (I♦ i" afe low r,�N&~� Source:City of Tigard memo on conditions&2016 S. Parks and Open Space The Tigard Park System Mater Plan provides the following information: The level of service standard for community and neighborhood parks is 3 acres and 1.5 acres per 1000 persons respectively in Tigard. The existing level of service in Tigard for community and neighborhood parks is 2.24 acres and .77 acres per 1000 persons respectively. Recommendations for park facilities in the Area are as follows: • Address park and recreation needs for this area in the final Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan; • Develop an on and off-street trail loop in the area with benches and other trail amenities; and • Explore the potential for a small plaza with seating for employee breaks. Tigard Park System Master Plan,p.59 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 14 The Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan augments the recommendations of the city's Park System Master Plan as follows: • Develop two neighborhood parks in the Area. Consider opportunities for incorporating regional stormwater facilities within park locations • Improve Red Rock Creek as both a natural and recreational amenity to make it a defining feature for the Triangle. A paved multi-use trail could connect this feature to the larger bicycle network. • Locate parks and plazas in the central and southern parts of the Triangle to take advantage of existing trees and vegetation.8 6. Other Utilities There is no fiber optic infrastructure in the Area. s Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan,p.33-34 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 15 C. Social Conditions Data from the US Census Bureau is used to identify social conditions in the Area. The geographies used by the Census Bureau to summarize data do not strictly conform to the Plan Area. As such,the Census Bureau geographies that most closely align to the Plan Area are used,which,in this case, is Block Group 1 of Census Tract 307. Within the Area, there are 14 tax lots shown as multifamily residential use.According to the US Census Bureau, American Community Survey(ACS)2010-14,the block group has 579 residents, 91%of whom are white. Table 4—Race in the Area White Alone 529 91% Black or African American Alone 0 0% American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 0 00/0 Asian Alone 33 6% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone 6 1% Some Other Race Alone 6 1% Two or More races 5 1% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 16 The largest percentage of residents in the block group is between 25-34 years of age (20%). Table 5 —Age in the Area Under 5 Years 24 4% 5 to 9 Years 37 6% 10 to 14 Years 40 7% 15 to 17 Years 19 3% 18 to 24 Years 51 9% 25 to 34 Years 114 20% 35 to 44 Years 87 15% 45 to 54 Years 85 15% 55 to 64 Years 55 9% 65 to 74 Years 55 9% 75 to 84 Years - 0% 85 Years and over 12 2% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates In the block group, 33%of adult residents have earned a bachelor's degree or higher. Another 27%have some college education without a degree, and another 29%have graduated from high school with no college experience. Table 6—Educational Attainment in the Area Less Than High School 45 11% High School Graduate(includes equivalency) 117 29% Some college 112 27% Bachelor's degree 119 29% Master's degree 0 0% Professional school degree 0 0% Doctorate degree 15 4% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 17 In the block group, 33%of commuters drove less than 10 minutes to work, and another 24% of commuters drove 10 to 19 minutes to work. Table 7—Travel Time to Work in the Area Less than 10 minutes 111 36% 10 to 19 minutes 72 24% 20 to 29 minutes 55 18% 30 to 39 minutes 20 7% 40 to 59 minutes 15 5% 60 to 89 minutes 12 4% 90 or More minutes 5 2% Worked at home 15 5% mmm Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Of the means of transportation used to travel to work,the majority, 64%,drove alone with another 21%carpooling. Table 8—Means of Transportation to Work in the Area Drove Alone 194 64% Carpooled 65 21 Public transportation(Includes Taxicab) 11 4% Motorcycle 0 0% Bicycle 0 0% Walked 20 7% Other means 0 0% Worked at home 15 5% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 18 D. Economic Conditions 1. Taxable Value of Property within the Area The estimated total assessed value of the Area calculated with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation for FYE 2016, including all real, personal, manufactured, and utility properties, is estimated to be$413,798,185. 7. Building to Land Value Ratio An analysis of property values can be used to evaluate the economic condition of real estate investments in a given area. The relationship of a property's improvement value (the value of buildings and other improvements to the property)to its land value is generally an accurate indicator of the condition of real estate investments. This relationship is referred to as the "Improvement to Land Value Ratio," or"I:L."The values used are real market values. In urban renewal areas,the I:L is often used to measure the intensity of development or the extent to which an area has achieved its short- and long-term development objectives. Table 9 below shows the improvement to land ratios for properties within the Tigard Triangle Area. The majority of parcels in the area (53%of the acreage)have I:L ratios of less than 1.0. In other words,the improvements on these properties are worth less than the land they sit on. A reasonable 1:L ratio for properties in the Area is 2.0. Only 41 parcels in the Area,totaling 16.68%of the acreage have I:L ratios of 2.0 or more in FYE 2016. In summary,the Area is underdeveloped and not contributing significantly-to the tax base in Tigard. Table 9-I:L Ratio of Parcels in the Area Improvement/Land Percellt of, Ratio Parcels Acres Acres Exempt 18 21.82 5.70% Condos 14 2.94 0.77% No Im rovement Value 47 41.09 10.73% 0.01-0.50 113 107.60 28.09% 0.51-1.00 43 55.51 14.49% 1.01-1.50 32 56.88 14.85% 1.51-2.00 19 33.28 8.69% 2.01-2.50 12 16.40 4.28% 2.51-3.00 13 30.41 7.94% 3.01-4.00 10 8.31 2.17% >4.00 6 8.79 2.29% Total 327 1383.04 1 100.00% Source:Calculated by Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 19 E. Impact on Municipal Services The fiscal impact of tax increment financing on taxing districts that levy taxes within the Area(affected taxing districts) is described in Section IX of this Report.This subsection discusses the fiscal impacts resulting from potential increases in demand for municipal services. The projects being considered for future use of urban renewal funding are transportation; public utilities;public spaces,facilities and installations; and re/development assistance and partnership projects. The use of urban renewal funding for these projects allows the city to match other funding sources to construct the improvements. It also allows the city to tap into different funding source besides the City of Tigard general fund or system development charges (SDC) funds. It is anticipated that these improvements will catalyze development on the undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels in the Area. This development would not occur were the infrastructure not upgraded. This development will require city services. However, since the property is within the city limits,the city has anticipated the need to provide services to the Area. As the development will be new construction or redevelopment, it will be up to current building code and will aid in any fire protection needs. An upgraded transportation system will also assist in fire prevention to the Area. The financial impacts from tax increment collections will be countered by providing future jobs in the Tigard Triangle Area and, in the future,placing property back on the property tax rolls with future increased tax bases for all taxing jurisdictions, including the city. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 20 III. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF EACH URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE PLAN The reason for selecting the Area is to provide the ability to fund improvements necessary to cure blight within the Area. The Area has been the focus of significant planning efforts over the years with the goal of transforming it from an underdeveloped area with substantial infrastructure deficiencies into an active. urban,multimodal, and mixed-use district. The Plan Overview Section in the Introduction to the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan provides additional background on why urban renewal was selected for this Area. IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA The projects identified for the Area are described below, including how they relate to the existing conditions in the Area. A. Infrastructure Improvements 1. New Hwy 217 Overpass—Extend Beveland Rd south over Hwy 217 to Hunziker/Wall with car,ped,and bike facilities. Existing conditions: Currently Beveland Rd ends on the west side of 217 near Lowe's Home Improvement, and there is no overpass or ped/bike facilities. 2. New Street(74th Ave)—Extend 74th Ave south from 99W to Hermoso or Beveland. Existing conditions: Currently 74th Ave only exists between SW Spruce and SW Torchwood Streets,north of 99W; 74th Ave south of 99W does not exist. 3. New Street(Atlanta St)—Extend Atlanta St west from 69th Ave to Dartmouth or future 74th Ave. Existing conditions: Currently Atlanta St has a westward boundary of SW 69th Ave. 4. New Hwy I-5 Overpass(Beveland)—Provide ped/bike bridge across Hwy 1-5 from Beveland Rd to Southwood Dr. Existing conditions: Currently Beveland has an eastward boundary of 68th Pkwy. 5. New Hwy I-5 Overpass (Red Rock Creek)—Provide pedestrian/bike bridge across Hwy I-5 between the Triangle and PCC Sylvania around location of Red Rock Creek. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 21 Existing conditions: Currently there is no bike/pedestrian overpass in this location. 6. Modified Intersection (Atlanta/68th)—Install traffic signal and turn lanes where needed. Existing conditions: Currently the Atlanta/68th intersection is a four way stop. 7. Modified Intersection (99W/68th)—Add protected left turn and transit improvements on 68th Pkwy at 99W. Existing conditions: Currently the left turn on 68th Pkwy yields to oncoming traffic. 8. Modified Streets (Various)—Develop comfortable, interesting, and attractive streetscapes, especially along designated pedestrian streets. Existing conditions: For the most part,the streets in the Area have limited or no pedestrian amenities and bike facilities. 9. New Trail(Red Rock Creek)—Build a trail along Red Rock Creek parallel to and south of 99W. Existing conditions:No trail currently exists. 10. New Streets(Various)—Improve connectivity, circulation, and access with new or extended local streets. Existing conditions: There is a lack of connectivity in the Area,with many parcels lacking internal local streets. Internally,the street network in the Triangle is somewhat of a grid, although some larger developments limit extending the street grid without impacts to either buildings or parking areas. The Triangle is also surrounded by highways,with primary access from OR 99W on the north side of the Triangle. The primary arterial through the Triangle is SW 72nd Avenue, linking OR 99W and OR 217. There is no direct access between downtown Tigard and the Triangle.9 11. Modified Street(72nd Ave)—Improve 72nd Ave corridor, including intersections/interchanges. Design dependent upon 72nd Ave Corridor Study recommendations. Existing conditions: 72nd Ave is the primary arterial through the Area, linking OR 99W and OR 217. 72nd Ave does not have bicycle lanes or sidewalks on the full length of the street. The street is congested And is not comfortable, interesting, or attractive to pedestrians. 9 Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan,p.6 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 22 12. Modified Street (99W)—Implement access management strategies and median projects in Hwy 99W Plan, including additional pedestrian crossing locations. Existing conditions: Highway 99W is an arterial on the northern edge of the Area. It is currently without bike lanes. The number of trips and speed of vehicles makes it difficult to develop a pedestrian oriented environment. 13. Modified Interchange(99W/Hwy 217)—Add second left turn lane on Hwy 217 northbound ramp to 99W. Existing conditions: Currently there is one left turn lane at this location. An additional turn lane would alleviate congestion at this interchange. 14. Modified Signals (Various)—Upgrade signals with adaptive signal coordination technology. Existing conditions: Currently the signals in the Area have not been upgraded with adaptive signal technology. 15. Parking Management Plan—Develop a plan and implement strategies for managing parking. Existing conditions: Currently there is no plan in place to manage or develop appropriate parking options to help facilitate the Area's transitions into a dense, pedestrian-oriented, and mixed-use district. 16. Transportation Study (Various)—Periodically evaluate the functioning of the transportation system to refine project scope and inform project prioritization. Existing conditions: Currently there is no study that provides this information. 17. Stormwater/Sewer—Develop a stormwater master plan for the Triangle and a greenway plan for Red Rock Creek that includes stormwater, sewer, and recreational needs. Existing conditions: The city does not currently have a Stormwater Master Plan but is in the process of developing one. Initial work on the plan has included an identification of known issues,which are shown on Figures 4 and 5. Issues are grouped into one of four categories,namely water quality,flooding, erosion, and maintainability. As the two maps show, issues in the Tigard Triangle are centered around Red Rock Creek, which serves as the main stormwater conveyance corridor for the area. 18. Stormwater—Construct approximately three regional stormwater facilities to meet new DEQ regulations for water quantity management. Existing conditions: The stormwater facilities in the Area are described in the physical conditions section of this Report and shown in Figures 4 and 5. They are presently deficient. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 23 19. Sewer—Extend public sewer system to areas served by private septic systems. Existing conditions: There are two areas in the Tigard Triangle that are not currently served by the public sewer system. These areas contain single-family residential uses on private septic systems that pre-date the area's current zoning. Redevelopment of these areas would likely trigger the requirement to extend the nearby sewer mains and connect to the public sewer system. The city's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan does not identify these as capital sewer projects because they are generally considered the responsibility of the property owner(s). See Figure 5 for a map showing the unsewered areas. One area is around 69,'Ave north of Dartmouth, and the other area is around Elmhurst St. east of 72nd Ave. These are shown on Figure 6 of this Report. 20. Stormwater/Sewer—Permanently fix compromised sewer lines in Red Rock Creek and restore creek channel and riparian buffer. Existing conditions: There is an existing sewer main that runs the length of the Red Rock Creek corridor in the Tigard Triangle. This main has had two breaks in the recent past that have been caused by erosive stormwater flows that have undercut the ground around the main. The city has completed emergency repairs but a permanent fix remains unfunded. See Figures 3 and 4 for two maps showing the areas of concern. Line 5201 identifies the general area of erosion, and Points 5106 and 5107 identify the location of the two breaks and subsequent repairs. 21. Water—Install new water mains as needed. Existing conditions: The TVWD Capital Improvement Plan for the adopted 2015-17 budget lists one specific project in the Tigard Triangle Area10,which is to increase the pipe size of the Metzger North-South Transmission Line to improve fire flow and provide additional capacity for future development. In general, improvements, such as replacement of aging infrastructure,are anticipated throughout the entire TVWD service area. 22. Public Spaces,Facilities,and Installations—Create a clear identity for the Triangle as a fun and diverse place to live and visit through the development of parks,plazas, greenways,public restrooms,recreational facilities,public art, wayfinding, gateway installations, and/or district signage. Existing conditions: There is currently no funding to do these improvements. 23. Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships—Provides assistance to new and existing businesses and housing developments through facade improvement grants/loans, streetscape improvements,technical/code/fee assistance, site 10 Tualatin Water District CIP Overview 2015-17 Budget,Section 17 Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 24 assembly, site cleanup/preparation, site acquisition, and/or partnerships that facilitate housing and mixed-use developments. Existing conditions: There is currently no funding to do these activities. 24. Finance Fees and Administration -This project will allow for the repayment of costs associated with the implementation of the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan. It also includes ongoing administration and any financing costs associated with issuing long- and short-term debt, relocation costs and other administrative costs. Existing Conditions: As there is currently no urban renewal program in this Area,these activities do not exist. V. THE ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF EACH PROJECT AND THE SOURCES OF MONEYS TO PAY SUCH COSTS The total urban renewal fund expenditures for all proposed projects by category are shown in Table IOa. Individual projects and cost estimates are shown in Table l Ob. All cost estimates shown are the most current figures available at the time of the preparation of the Plan. The Plan assumes that the city will seek out other funding sources to pay for many of the urban renewal projects listed and use urban renewal funds as leverage. These sources include City of Tigard general funds and system development charges. The city may also pursue regional, County, State, and federal funding and private developer contributions. The Agency will be able to review and update fund expenditures and allocations on an annual basis when the annual budget is prepared. Table I Oa—Projects to be Completed Using Urban Renewal Funds by Category Prolect Funding Categories Expenditures Percent oionunal .s') (constant Allocations Transportation $87,803,000 $40,000,000 42% Public Utilities $21,410,600) $13,000,000 14.25% Public Spaces,Facilities,and Installations $30,369,400 ($15,000,000) 16% Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships $39,211,300) $22,000,000 23% Project Administration $6,607,100 $3,500,000 3.7% Finance Fees ($1,648,100) ($1.000,000) 1.05% Total Expenditures 100% 7d Source:City of Tigard,Tiberius Solutions LLC forecasts Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 25 Table l Ob—Projects to be Completed Using Urban Renewal Funds Pmjccl Project I�Jw Project Description Cost VR4 Number 1-unding in SM I New Hwy 217 Overpass Fxtend Beveland Rd south over Hwy 217 to H,maker Rd/Wan st area 50 5 (Be\eland) with car,ped,and bike facilities. 2 New Street(74th Ave) Extend 74th Ave south from 99V1'to Henmso Way or Beveland Rd. 5 5 3 New Street(Atlanta) Extend Atlanta St west from 69th A••e to Dartmouth St or firm 74th 4 3 Ave. 4 New Hw,I-5 Overpass(Beveland) Provide ped bice bridge across Hwy I-5 from Beveland Rd to 6 1 Southwood Dr. 5 New Hwy I-5 Overpass(Red Rock Creek) Provide ped.bike bridge across Hwy 1-5 between the Triangle and 6 1 PCC Sylvania around location ofRed Rock Creek. Install traffic signal and tum lanes where needed at Atlanta St/68th Am e 6 Modified Intersection(AtJanta'681h) 0.5 0.5 utersection Add protected left tum and transit improvements on 68th Pkwy at 7 Modified Intersection(99A'/68th) 99W 4 1 8 Modred Streets Develop comfortable,interesting,and attractive streetscapes throughout the Area,especially along designated pedestrian streets. TBD 3.5 9 New Trail(Red Rock Creek) Build a new trail along Red Rock Creek parallel to and south of99 W. 3 3 10 New Streets Improve connectivity,circulation,and access throughout the Area with 5 4 new or e)aended local streets. TBD.Improve 72nd Ave corridor,including intersections/interchanges. 11 Modified Street(72nd Are) Dependent on 72nd Ave Corridor Study recommendations. 'IBD 8 Implement access management strategies and median projects in Hwy 12 Modified Street(99W) TSD 0.6 99W Plan,including additional pedestrian crossing locations. 13 Modeled Interchange(99Vu'.'Hw;217) Add second left tun lone on Hwy 217 northbound ramp to 99W. 3 0.6 14 Modified Signals Upgrade signals throughout the Area with adaptive signal coordination 1.2 0.3 technology. 15 Parking Management Plan Develop a plan and irrnplem ent strategies for managing parking. TBD 3 Periodically evaluate the finuctionvng ofthe transportation system to 16 Transportation Study refine project scope and inform project prioritization 0.5 0.5 Source:City of Tigard,Tiberius Solutions LLC forecasts Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 26 Table 10b—Projects to be Completed Using Urban Renewal Funds,page 2 Develop a stornm ater master plan for the Triangle and a 17 Stonrmater.'sewer greenvvay plan for Red Rock Creek that addresses 0.3 0.3 storrmlater sewer,and recreational needs. 18 Stor mater Construct approximately three regional stomnvater facilities to TBD 8.2 meet neve DEQ regulations for water quantity manaWment 19 Sewer Extend public sewer system to areas served by private septic 5 1 systems. Permanently foe compromised sewer lines in Red Rock Creek 20 Stonmvater/Sevver 3 3 and restore creek channel and riparian bufi'er. 21 Water Install new water mains as needed. 4 0.5 Creates a clear identity for the Triangle as a fim and diverse place to live and visit through the development ofparks, 22 Public Spaces,Facilities,and Installations plazas,greemays,public restrooms,recreational facilities, TBD 15 public art,wayfimding,gateway insmilabons,and/or district s' Provides assistance to new and existing businesses and housing developments through faode improvement 23 Re/Development Assistance and grants/bans,streetscape improvements,technical/code/ke TBD 22 Partnerships assistance,site assembly,site clean-up/preparation,site acgimtion,and/or partnerships that fackate housing and mixed-use developments. Allows for repayment of costs associated with implementation ofthe Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Platt Includes ongoing 24 Finance Fees and Plan Administration administration and any financing costs associated with issuing 4.5 4.5 long-and short-berm debt,relocation costs,and other administrative costs. Total I IT13D 1 $94.50 Source:City of Tigard,Tiberius Solutions LLC forecasts 1. Project Cost Estimate Notes Transportation project estimates(Projects I — 16)were developed by City of Tigard staff and utilized a number of relevant sources, including but not limited to cost estimates in the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan and itemized bids from recent capital improvement projects. The cost estimate for Project 17 came from the city's 2016-17 Capital Improvement Plan(CIP). Since the CIP estimate did not include a sewer component, the City Engineer advised increasing this estimate by$100,000. The cost estimate for Project 18 was extrapolated from regional stormwater facility estimates developed for the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan. Since these estimates included land value assumptions for rural land,the city's Economic Development Manager advised doubling these land value assumptions in order to better reflect the cost of acquiring land in a more urbanized area. Cost estimates for Projects 19 and 21 came from the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan. These estimates were for general water and sewer system upgrades and did not contemplate any specific project. Lastly,the cost estimate for Project 20 was developed by the City Engineer after reviewing a number of similar stream restoration/sewer stabilization projects of varying scopes that were recently completed by the city. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 27 VI. THE ANTICIPATED COMPLETION DATE FOR EACH PROJECT The schedule for construction of projects will be based on the availability of funding. The projects will be ongoing and will be completed as directed by the Agency. Rather than identify the specific timing and dollar amount of individual projects,the forecast for the allocation of funding over time is shown for four broad categories of projects: transportation; public utilities;public spaces,facilities, and installations; and re/development assistance and partnerships. Annual expenditures for project administration and finance fees are also shown. The Area is anticipated to complete all projects and have sufficient tax increment finance revenue to terminate the district in FYE 2053. The projections in the financial model assume 4.5%annual growth in the assessed value of real property in the urban renewal area, and no change in the value of personal, utility, or manufactured property value. Estimated annual expenditures by project category are shown in Table 11. All costs shown in Table 11 are in year-of-expenditure dollars,which are adjusted by 3%annually to account for inflation. The Agency may change the completion dates in their annual budgeting process or as project decisions are made in administering the Plan. The first year of tax increment collections is anticipated to be FYE 2019. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 28 Table 11 -Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars 241114-11) 24119-20 24120-21 21121-22 2 11-22-23 21123-24 2024-25 2025-26 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 $189 $9,051 $12,808 $18,545 $22,168 $21306 $26,804 Pay-as-you-go(Transfer from TIF Fund $167,538,676 $382,689 $195,861 $409,412 $63 573 S420,430 $664127 $918,791 $671,361 Bond/Loan Proceeds $73,525,000 $0 $4,875,000 $0 $0 $5,550,000 $0 $0 $6,400,000 Interest Earnings $264,968 $0 $1 $45 $b4 $93 $111 $107 $134 Total Resources $241,328,644 $382,689 $5,071,051 $418,508 $645,445 $"89,06 68 $686,4061 $940,204 $7,098,299 Expenditures(noxdnal$) Pro' ctAdministration -$6,607,100 4109300 -$112,600 -$115,900 $119,400 -$123000 -$12 700 413 500 -$134,400 Transportation -$87,803,000 -$2,251,000 -$1,229,900 -$652,400 43,359,800 Utilities -$21,410,600 -$337,700 -$3,689,700 -$1343,900 Public Spaces,Fadities,and Installations -$30,369,400 41,125,500 -$1,343,900 Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships -$39,211,300 -$273,200 -$1,125,500 4289,800 -$507,500 -$799,400 -$538,400 -$130,500 4739,100 Finance Fees -$1,648,100 -$109,700 4124,900 -$144,000 Total Fzpcnditures -$187,049,500 -$382,500 -$5,062,000 -$405,700 -$626,900 -$5,966,900 -$665,100 -$913,400 -$7,065,100 JFmding Fund Balance $189 $9,051 $12,808 $18,545 $22,1681 S21,3061 $26,8041 $33,199 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 29 Table 11 —Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars, page 2 2026-27 2027-2N 2028-29 2029-311 2030-31 2031-32 2032-33 2033-34 21134�15 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $33,199 $13,925 $6,5691 $7,219 $4,829 $22,866 $34 766 $6,583 A013 Pay-as-you-go ransfer from TIF Fund $949460 $1,240,074 W6,0171 $1,283,374, $1,615,013 $1,303,586 $1,665,743 $2,044,197 $1,678,428 Bond/Loan Proceeds $0 $0 S7,2200,0001 $0 $0 $8,200,000 $0 $0 $9,200,000 Interest Fermin s $166 $70 $33 $36 $24 $114 $174 $33 $40 Total Resources $982,825 $1,254,069 $8,172,619 $1,290,629 $1,619,866 $9,526,566 $1,700,683 $2,050,8131 $10,886,481 Expenditures(nominal S) Project Administration -$13 400 .$14Z600 -$146,900 -$151,300 -$155,800 -$160,500 -$165,300 4170200 4175,400 Transportation 4779,000 48,023 00 Utilities -$2,937,000 1 -$5,260,500 Pubfic Spaces,Facilities,and Installations -S2,716,700 43 07 000 Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships -$830,500 41,104,9001 -$2,202,800 -$1,134,500 -$662,200 41,123,300 -$1,528,800 -$1,87Z600 -$1709,700 Finance Fees -$162,000 -$184,500 -$207 000 Total Eqxnditures 4968,900 -$1,247,500 48,165,400 41,285 00 41 97,000 49,491,800 -$1,694,100 -$2,042,800 410,859,600 lEncing Fund Balance $13,925 $6,569 $7,2191 $4,8291 $22,8661 $34,7661 $6,5831 $8,0131 S26.9811 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 30 Table 11 —Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars, page 3 2035-36 2036-37 20.17-3N 2038-39 203940 2041141 204142 204243 20-1344 PROJECT FUND Resources Beginning Fund Balance $26,881 $41724 $7,622 $5,952 $28,697 S41 $14,770 $5 568 S43,085 Pay-as-you-go(Transfer from TIF Fund $2,091,709 $2,523,589 $2,116,792 $2,588,415 $2,442,000 $2,957,024 $3,495,224 $ 986 089 $3,573,817 Bond/Loan Proceeds $0 $0 $9,300,000 $0 S10 00 000 $0 $0 $12,600,000 SO Interest Earnings $134 $209 $38 $30 $143 $206 $74 $28 $215 Total Resources $2,118,724 $2,565,522 $11,424,452 $2,594,397 $12,670,840 $2,998,470 $3,510,0681 $15,591,685 $3,617,117 Expenditures(normal$) Project Administration -$180,600 -$186,000 -$191,600 -$197400 -$203,300 -$209,400 -$215,700 -$222,100 -$228,800 Transportation -$9,580,500 X680,500 -$1,132,200 -$9,051,800 -$2,802,700 Utilities -S4,065,6001 -$3,776,200 Public Spaces,Facilities and Installations -$6,098,400 Re/Develoment Assistance and Partnerships -$1,896,400 - 371,900 -$1,437,100 -S2,368,300 -$2032,800 42,093,800 -$2,156,600 -$2,22000 -$572,000 Finance Fees -$209,300 -$229,500 -5277 Total Fxpentfitures -$2,077,000 -$2,557,900 -511,418,500 -$2,565,700 -$12,629,600 -S2,983,700 -$3,504,500 -$15,548,600 -$3,603,500 FAding Fund Balance I S41,7241 $7,6221 $5,9521 $28,6971 $41,240 $14,770 $5,568 $43,0851 $13,617 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 31 Table 11 -Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars,page 4 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $13,617 $18,878 $22,531 $36,699 $56,713 $58,891 $39,254 $62,436 $60,831 Pay-as-you-go Transfer from TIF Fund K187,993 S5,343,359 $6.014,055 $6,714,931 $8.025,094 $8,790 469 $9,590,286 $11,084,083 $11,957,502 Bond/Loan Proceeds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Interest Earnings $68 $94 $113 $183 $284 $294 $196 $312 $304 Total Resources 54,201,678 $5,362,331 $6,036,699 $6,751,813 $8,082,091 $8,849,654 $9,629,736 S11,146,831 S12,018,637 Expenditures(nominal S) Project Administration -$235,700 $242,700 -$250,000 -$257,500 -$265 -$273 $281400 -$289,800 -$298,500 Transportation -$4,490,300 -$5,793,800 -$7,990,800 -$8,723,100 $10,216,500 -$,1-1-,0-4-5,-20-0- Utilities $11045,200Utilities Public Spaces,Facilities,and installations -$3,358,000 -$5,125,000 -$7,094,900 Re/Develo went Assistance and Partnerships -$589,100 $606,800 -$625,000 -$643,800 -$663,100 $546,400 -$562,800 -$579,700 -$671,700 Finance Fees Total Fa nditures -54,182,800 -55,339,800 -S6,000,000 -$6,695,100 48,023,200 -$8,810,400 -$9,567,300 -311,086,000 -S12,015,400 Ewing Fund Balance S18,8781 $22,531 $36,699 $56,7131 $58,891 $39,2541 S62,4361 560,831 $3,237 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 32 VII. THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES REQUIRED AND THE ANTICIPATED YEAR IN WHICH INDEBTEDNESS WILL BE RETIRED Table 12 shows the allocation of tax increment revenues to debt service and transfers to the project fund. It is anticipated that all debt will be retired by FYE 2053 (any outstanding bonds will be defeased). The maximum indebtedness is $188,000,000 (one hundred and eighty-eight million dollars). The estimated total amount of tax increment revenues required to service the maximum indebtedness of$188 million is $278,560,738 and is made up of tax increment revenues from permanent rate levies. The interest rate for the loans and bonds are estimated at 5%with varying terms. The assumed financing plan maintains a debt service coverage ratio of at least 1.5 x total annual debt service payments. The time frame of urban renewal is not absolute; it may vary depending on the actual ability to meet the maximum indebtedness. If the economy is slower, it may take longer; if the economy is more robust than the projections, it may take a shorter time period. The Agency may decide to issue bonds or take on loans on a different schedule, and that will alter the financing assumptions. These assumptions show one scenario for financing and that this scenario is financially feasible. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 33 Table 12—Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TEF for URA $278,560,738 $382,699 $587,044 $800,595 $1,023,756 $1,256,959 $1,500,656 $1,755,320 $2,021,443 Total Resources $278,560,738 $382,689 $587,044 $800,595 $1,02-3,75-6- $1,256,959 $1,500,656 $1,755,320 $2,021,443 Expenditures Debt Service New Loan 2020 g-$7,823660 -$391183 -$391183 -$391183 -$391183 -$391 183 -$391,183 -$391,183 New Loan 2023 920 -$445346 -$445,346 -$445,346 -$445,346 New Loan 2026 - 060 -$513,553 New Loan 2029 -$11,554,940 New Loan 2032 -$13 159,780 New Loan 2035 -$14,463,8261 1 New Loan 2038 -$13,729,760 New Loan 2040 -$14,426,216 New Loan 2043 -$16,685,900 Total Debt Service -$111,022,062 $0 4391,183 -$391,183 -$391,183 -$836,529 -$836,529 -$836,529 -$1,350,082 Coverap Ratio $0 $2 $2 $3 $2 $2 $2 $1 Transfer to Project Fund -$167,538,676 -$382,689 -$195,861 -5409 412 -$632,573 4420,430 -$664127 -$918 791 -$671,361 Total Expenditures X278,560,738E-132 -$587,044 X800,595 X1,023,756 X1,256,959 X1,500,656 X1,755,320 X2,021,443 Endin Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cumulathe D/S Remainin -$110,630,879 -$110,239,696 -$109,848,513 -$109 011984 -$108,175,455 -$107,338,926 -$105,988,844 TIF Sufficient to Pay Off D/S NO I NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 34 Table 12-Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service,page 2 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TIF for URA $2,299,542, S2,590,156 $2,893,846 $3,211,203 $3,542,842 $3,889,404 $4,251,561 $4,630,015 $5025500 Total Resources $2,299,542 $2,590,156 $2,893,846 $3,211,203 $3,542,842 $3,889,404 $4,251,561 $4,630,015 $5,025,500 Expenditums Debt Service New Loan 2020 -$391,183 -$391,183 -$391,183 4391,183 -$391,183 4391,183 -$391,183 -$391,183 -$391,183 New Loan 2023 -$445,346 -W5,346 4445,346 -$445,346 4445,346 -$445,346 -$445,346 -S"5,346 -W5,346 New Loan 2026 4513,553 4513,553 -$513,553 -$513,553 -$513,553 4513,553, -S513,55 -$513,553 -$513,553 New Loan 2029 4577 747 45771747 4577.747 -$577,747 -$577,747 4577,747 -$577,747 New Loan 2032 4657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 New Loan 2035 1 -$761,254 New Loan 2038 New Loan 2040 New Loan 2043 Total Debt Service 41,350,082 -$1,350,082 -51,927,829 -$1,927,829 -$1,927,829 -$2,585,818 -$2,585,818 -$2,585,818 -$3,347,072 Coverage Ratio $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 Transfer to Project Fund -$949,460 -$1,240,074 -$ 017 -$1,283,374 -$1,615,013 -$1,303,586 -$1665 743 -$2,044,197 -$1,678,428 Total Kqznditures -$2,299,542 -$2,590,156 -$2,893,846 -$3,211,203 -$3,542,842 -$3,889,404 -$4,251,561 -$4,630,015 -$5,025,500 En(fing Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cumulative D/S Remaining -$104,638,762 -$103,288,680 4101,360,851 -$99433022 -$97,505,193 -$94,919375 -$92,333,557 -$89,747,739 -$86,400,667 TIF Sufficient to Pay OffD/S NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 35 Table 12-Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service,page 3 2035-36 2036-37 2037-38 2038-39 2031141) 204041 204142 204243 20434.1 r Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 TIF for URA $5,438,781 $5,870,661 S6,321,974 $6,793,597 $7,286,443 $7,801,467 $8,339,667 086 $9,489,814 Total Resources $5,438,781 $5,970,661 $6,321,974 $6,793,597 $7,286,443 $7,801,467 $8,339,667 $8 902 086 $9,489,814 Fxpendtures Debt Service New Loan 2020 -$391,183 -$391,183 -$391,183 4391,183 New Loan 2023 -$445,346 -$445,346 -$445,346 4445,346 -$445,346 -$445 -$445,346 Nem Loan 2026 -$513,553 45I3,553 4513,553 -$513,553 4513,553 4513,553 -$513,553 -$513,553 4513,553 New Loan 2029 -$577,747 4577,747 -$577,747 -$577,747 4577,747 -$577,747 -$577,747 -$577,747 -$577,747 New Loan 2032 4657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 4657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 4657,989 New Loan 2035 -$761,254 4761 -$761,254 4761,254 -$761,254 -$761,254 -$761 -$761,254 -$761,254 New Loan 2038 -S858,110 -S858,110 -$858,110 4858,110 -$858,110 -$858,110 -$8581110 Nem Loan 2040 -$1,030,444 41,030,444 -$1,030,444 -$1,030,444 41,030,444 New Loan 2043 -$1,516,900 41,516,900 Total Debt Service -$3,347,072 -$3,347,072 -$4,205,182 -$4,205,182 -$4,844,443 44,844,443 -$4,844,443 -$5,915,997 -$5,915,997 Coverage Ratio $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 Transfer to Project Fund -$2,091,709 -$2,523,589 -$2,116,792 -$2,588,415 -$2,442,000 -$2,957,024 -$3,495,224 -$2,986,089 -$3,573,817 Total JN ndtures -$5,438,781 -$5,870,661 $6,321,974 -$6,793,597 47,286,443 47,801,467 -$8,339,667 48,902,086 -$9,489,814 Fn(fing Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cumulative D/S Rcmainin -$83,053,595 -$79,706,523 -$75,501,341 -$71,296,159 466,451,716 461,607,273 456,762,830 -$50,846,833 -$44,930,836 TIF Sufficient to Pay Off D/S NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 36 Table 12-Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service,page 4 Resources Beginning Fund Balance 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TIF for URA $10,103,990 $10,745,803 $11416 499 $12117,325 $12,849791 $13,615,166 $14,414,983 $15;250,791 $16,124,210 Total Resources $10,103,990 510,745,803 $11,416,499 $12,117,375 S12,849,791 S13,615,166 $1144,441144,998-33 S15,250,791 516,124,210 &Pencitures Debt Service New Loan 2020 New Loan 2023 New Loan 2026 -$513,553 New Loan 2029 -$577,747 -$577,747 $577,747 -$577,747 New loan 2032 -$657,989 -$657,989 $657,989 4657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 -$657,989 New Loan 2035 -$761,254 4761,254 $761,254 -$761 -$761,254 -$761,254 -$761,254 -$761,254 -$761,254 New Uan2038 -$858,110 -$858,110 4858,110 -$858,110 -$858,110 -$858,110 -$&58,110 $858,110 -$858,110 New Loan 2040 -$1,030,444 -$1,030444 -$1,030,444 $1,030,444 $1030444 -$1,030,444 -$1,030444 -$1030,444 -$1,030,444 New Loan 2043 -$1,516,900 -$1,516,900 -$1,516,900 41,516,900 41,516,900 -$1 16,900 -$1,516,900 -$1,516,900 -$1,516,900 Total Debt Service $5,915997 $5,402,444 $5,402,444 45,402,444 44,824,697 $4,824,697 -54,824,697 $4,166,708 $4,166,708 Coverage Ratio $2 $2 $2 $2 $3 $3 $3 $4 $4 Tra r to Project Fund -$4,187,993 -$5,343,359 -$6,014,055 -$6,714,931 -$8,025,094 -$8,790,469 -$9,590,M $11,084,083 -$11,957,502 Total Ependitures 510,103,990 410,745,803 411,416,499 $12,117,375 412,849,791 413,615,166 -$14,414,283 -$15,250,791 416,124,210 EmdIng Fund Balance SO s0 SO $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 Cumulative D/S Remaining -$39,014,839 433,612,3951 428,209,951 $22,807,507 -$17,9V,8101 -$13,158,113 X8,333,416 X4166 708 $0 TIF Sufficient to Ny Off DIS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 37 VIII. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN The estimated tax increment revenues through FYE 2053,as shown above, are based on projections of the assessed value of development within the Area and the consolidated tax rate that will apply in the Area. The assumptions include assumed growth in assessed value of 4.5%for real property,derived from a combination of appreciation of existing property values and new construction.No change in value for personal, utility, and manufactured property is assumed. Table 13 shows the projected incremental assessed value,tax rates and tax increment revenues each year,adjusted for discounts, delinquencies, and compression losses. These projections of increment are the basis for the projections in Tables 11 and 12. The first year of tax increment collections is FYE 2019. Gross TIF is calculated by multiplying the tax rate times the excess value. The tax rate is per thousand dollars of value, so the calculation is"tax rate times excess value divided by one thousand." The consolidated tax rate includes permanent tax rates only, and excludes general obligation bonds and local option levies which would not be impacted by this Plan. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 38 Table 13-Projected Incremental Assessed Value, Tax Rates, and Tax Increment Revenues 1117 X%%"svd\alut I-rozen Ba�e LXCCS S N III ut I a%Itate Gross I'll Adjustment% No-1 IF III 20191 541,205 $429,654,966 $33,886,339 11.8877 402 831 20,142 382,689 382,689 2020 $481,636,527 $429 654,966 $51,981561 11.8877 617,941 30 587 044 969,733 2021 $500 546,034 $429 654966 $70 891068 11.8877 84 732 4213 800,595 1770 328 2022 $520 306469 $429 654,966 $90651503 11.8877 1077 638 53,882 1,023 756 2,794,084 202356123 $429,654,966 $111 1 157 11.8877 1 23,115 156 1 6 959 4,051,043 202435 012 $429,654,966 $132,880,046 046 11.8877 1,579,638 78 982 1.500 656 5,551699 202584,951 $429,654,966 $155,429,985 11.8877 1,847,705 85 1755 20 7,307,019 2026 $608,649,637 $429 654 966 $178,994,671 11.8877 2,127,835 (106,392) 021,443 9,328,462 2027 $633,274,734 $429 654,966 $203,619,768. 11.8877 420,571 (121,029) 2,299,542 11628 004 20280$6549,9007,960 $429 654 966 $229 52 994 11.88772,726,480 136,324 2,590,156 14,218,160 2029 $685,899,181 $429,654,966 $256,244,215 11.8877 3,046154 (152,308) 2,893,846 17 l12 006 2,030 $714,000,507 $429,654,966 $284,345,541 11.8877 3,390,214 169.011 3211,203 20 23 09 2031 $743 66 93 $429,654,966 $313,711,427 11.8877 3,729,307 186,465 3542 842 23,866,051 2032 $774,053,744 $429,654,966 $344,398,778 11.8877 4.094,109 (204,705) 3,889 404 27,755,455 2033 $806,1 026 $429,654,966 $376,467,060 11.8877 4,475,327 7 4,251,561 32,007,016 2034 $839 633 380 $429,654 966 $409,978,414 11.8877 4,873 700 24368 4,630,015 36 637 031 2035 $874,652.745 $429 654 966 $444 997 779 11.8877 5290 000 264,500 5025 500 41,662,531 2036 $911 7 982 $429,654,966 $481593016 11.8877 5,725,033 286 252 5 438 781 47101 312 2037 $949 490 004 $429,654,966 $519 835 038 11.8877 179,643 308 82 5,870,661 52,971,973 2038 $989,45Z917 $429,654,966 $559,797,951 11.8877 6.654 710 33273 6321974 59,293,947 2039 $1,031,214,161 $429 654 966 $601,559,195 11.8877 7151 155 (357.558) 6,793,597 66,087,544 2040 $1,074,854,661 $429 654 966 $645,199,695 11.8877 7 669 940 383,49 7,286 443 73,373,987 2041 $1,120,458,994 $429,654 966 SW-804-018 11.8877 8,212,071 (410,604) 7,801,467 81,175,454 2042 $1,168,115,501 $429,654,966 $738,460,535 11.8877 8,778,597 438,930 8,339,667 89,515.121 2043 $1,217,916,562 $429 654,966 S798,261,596 11.8877 9,370,617, (468,531) 8.901086 086 98 417 207 2044 $1,269,958,670 $429,654,966 $840,303,704 11.8877 9,989,278 499 464 9,489,814 107,907,021 2045 $1324.342.673 $429,654966 $894,687,707 11.8877 10,635 779 (531,789) 10.103 990 118,011,011 2046 $1,381,173,9 $429,654,966 $951,518,990 11.8877 11,311,372 (565,569) 10,745,803 129756 814 2047 $1,440,562,647 $429,654,966 $1,010,907,681 11.8877 12,017,367 600,868 11,416 499 140,173,313 2048 $1,502,623,829 $429,654,966 $1-072,968.963 11.8877 1 755132 (637,757) 1 117,375 152,290,688 2049 $1,567,477,764 $429,654,966 8 11.8877 135 096 676 05 1 849 791 165,140,479 2050 $1635250126 $429 654 0 11,8877 1433]754 716588 13 615 166 17 755 645 2051 $1,706 45 $429 654966911.8877 15173666 758683 14414,983 193 170 628 2052 $1780081359 $429,654,9663 11.8877 16,053,464 802 673 15,250,791 208 421419 2053 $1,857-420,883 $429,654,966 $1,427.765,917 11.8877 16,972.853 (848,643) 16124 210 224,545,629 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Notes:TIF is tax increment revenues.Tax rates are expressed in terms of dollars per$1,000 of assessed value. Revenue sharing is part of the 2009 legislative changes to urban renewal and means that, at thresholds defined in ORS 457.470,the impacted taxing jurisdictions will receive a share of the incremental growth in the area. The share is a percentage basis dependent upon the tax rates of the taxing jurisdictions.The first threshold is 10%of the original maximum indebtedness. At the 10%threshold,the Agency will receive the full 10%of the initial maximum indebtedness plus 25%of the increment above the 10%threshold and the taxing jurisdictions will receive 75%of the increment above the 10%threshold.The second threshold is set at 12.5% of the maximum indebtedness. If this threshold is met,revenue for the district would be capped at 12.5%of the maximum indebtedness,with all additional tax revenue being shared with affected taxing districts. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 39 This 12.5%threshold is not anticipated to be reached prior to the termination of this district. Revenue sharing targets are not projected to be reached during the life of the Area. If assessed value in the Area grows more quickly than projected,the revenue sharing triggers could be reached. IX. IMPACT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING This section describes the impact of tax increment financing of the maximum indebtedness, both until and after the indebtedness is repaid,upon all entities levying taxes upon property in the Area. The impact of tax increment financing on overlapping taxing districts consists primarily of the property tax revenues foregone on permanent rate levies as applied to the growth in assessed value in the Area. These projections are for impacts estimated through FYE 2053, and are shown in Tables 14a and 14b. The Tigard-Tualatin School District and the Northwest Regional Education Service District are not directly affected by the tax increment financing, but the amounts of their taxes divided for the urban renewal plan are shown in the following tables. Under current school funding law,property tax revenues are combined with State School Fund revenues to achieve per-student funding targets. Under this system,property taxes foregone,due to the use of tax increment financing,may be replaced with State School Fund revenues, as determined by a funding formula at the State level. Local revenues, including property tax revenues, are an offset under the State School Fund formula. Tables 14a and 14b show the projected impacts to permanent rate levies of taxing districts as a result of this Plan. Table 14a shows the general government levies, and Table 14b shows the education levies. General obligation bonds and local option levies are impacted by urban renewal only if they were originally approved by voters in an election prior to October 6, 2001. There are no local option levies or general obligation bonds approved prior to October 6,2001 that will still be in effect in the Area at the time that tax increment revenues begin to be collected. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 40 Table l4a-Projected Impact on Taxing District Permanent Rate Levies - General Government Perin Perin Perm Perm Per") Perm Subtotal 2019 ($72,381) $80,902 $49 099 $ 25 $486 $2,89 ($208,022) 2020 $111032 $124103 ($75,318) $3,462 $7 $4.444 $319105 2021 ($151,422) $169 248 ($102,717) ($4,721) ($1,017) ($6,061) ($435,186) 2022 ($193,630) ($216,425) $131349 ($6,037) $1 300 ($7,751) ($556,492) 2023 ($237,737) ($265,725) $161269 ($7,412) ($1,597) C$9,516) ($683,256) 2024 $283,829 ($317,244) ($192,535) ($8,849) ($1.906) ($11,361) ($815,724 2025 $331,995 $371,081 $225,209 $10.351 (S2XO) $13,289 $954,155 2026 ($382,329) $427,340 ($259,353) $11920 $2,568 $15,304 ($1,098,814) 2027 ($431M $486131 ($295,033) ($13,560) ($2,921) ($17,409) ($1,249,982) 2028 ($489,893) $547 568 $332.319 ($15,274) ($3,290) ($19,610) ($1,407,954) 2029 $547332 $611769 $371282 $17065 $3676 $21,909 $1,573,033 2030 ($607,356) $678.859 $41 000 ($18,936) $4,079 ($24,312) ($1.745,542) 2031 $670,081 ($748,969) $454,549 ($20,892) ($4,500) (S26,822) $l925813 2032 $735.629 (W2,233) ($499,013) ($22,935) ($4,940) $29, ($2,114,196) 2033 $804126 ($8%,794) ($545,478) ($25,071) ($5,400) $3 188 ($2,311,057) 2034 ($875,706) ($978,801) $594.034 ($27,303) $5,881 ($35,053) $2516 778 2035 ($950,506), $1,062,408 ($644,775) $29,635 ($6,383) $3804 $2,731,754 2036 ($1,028,673) $1149 7 ($697,799) ($32,072) ($6,908) ($41,176) $2 956 405 2037 ($1110,357) $1241078 ($753,210) $34618 $7,45 ($44,446) $3191 166 2038 ($1,195,717) $1,336,48 $811.114 $37,280 ($8,030) ($47,963) ($3,436,491) 2039 ($1,284,918) $1436189 5871623 ($40,061) $8 629 $51433 ($3,692,853) 2040 ($1,378,134) ($1,540,3 ($934,856) 54 96 $9 255 ($55,165) 2041 $1,475,543 ($1,649,257) $1,000,934 $46,004 $9 910 $59 064 ($4,240,712) 2042 ($1,577,337) ($1,763,034) $1,069,98 $49178 $10 593 $63,138 $4133265 2043 ($1,683,711) $1881931 ($1,142,144) ($52,494) $11,308 (S67-396) 2044 $1,794,872 ($2,006,179) $1,217,550 ($55,960) $12 054 $718 $5 158461 2045 $1911035 ($2,136,018) $1.296,349 ($59,582) ($12,834) ($76,496) ($5,492,314) 2046 ($2,032,425) ($2,271,699) ($63,366) ($13,650) (S81,355) 2047 ($2,159,279) ($2,413,487) ($1.464,745) ($67,321) ($14,501) S86 433 ($6,205,766) 2048 $2,291840 $2,561 654 $1,55466 $71,454 ($15,392) $91739 $6,586,7 2049 ($2,430,367) ($1,648,637) ($75,773) $16,322 $97,284 ($6,984,872) 2050 ($2,575,127) $2 878 292 ($1,746,835) $80 28 $17 294 ($103,078) ($7,400,913) 2051 52,726 402 ($3,047,376) $85 003 $18 310 ($109,134) 2052 $2 884 484 $3 24 069 $1 956 68 $89 932 $19 372 ($115,461) ($8,290,005) 2053 ($3,049,679) $95.082 $20 481 ($122,074) Total ($42,469,812)1($47,469,708)1($28,809,360)1 $1,324,114 S285 20 51,700 000'- ($122,058,214 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 41 Table 14b-Projected Impact on Taxing District Permanent Rate Levies -Education FYE Perin Perm Perin Suhtoull 2019 ($9,104) ($4,951 $160,612 $174,667 ($382,689 2020 $13,965 $7,595 ($246,379) $267,939 $587,044 2021 $19,046 $10,358 $336,005 $365,409 $800,595 2022 $24,354 $13,245 $429,665 $467,264 $1,023,756) 2023 $29,902 $16,262 $527,539 $573,703 $1,256,959 2024 $35,700) $19,415 $629,817 $684,932 $1,500,656 2025 $41,758 ($22,710 $736,698 $801,166 ($1,755,321 2026 $48,089 $26,153 ($848,388) $922,630 $2,021.444 2027 $54,704 $29,751 $965,105 $1,049,560 $2,299,542 2028 ($61,618) $33,511 ($1,087,074) $1,182,203 $2,590,157 2029 $68,843 ($37,440) ($1,214,531 $1,320,814 $2,893,847 2030 $76,392 $41,546 $1,347,724 $1,465,662 $3,211,204 2031 $84,282 ($45,836) ($1,486,911 $1,617,029 $3,542,842 2032 $92,526 $50,320 $1,632,361 $1,775,207 $3,889,403 2033 ($101,142) $55,006 ($1,784,356) $1,940,504 $4,251,561 2034 $110,145 ($59,902 $1,943,191 $2,113,238 $4,630,016 2035 $119,553 $65,019 $2,109,174 $2,293,746 $5,025,500 2036 $129,385 $70,366 ($2'282'625) $2,482,376 $5,438,781 2037 $139,659 $75,953 $2,463,883 $2,679,495 $5,870,661 2038 $150,395 $81,792 $2,653,296 $2,885,483 $6,321974 2039 $161,615 $87,894 $2,851,234 $3,100,743 $6,793,596 2040 $173,339 $94,270 $3,058,079 $3,325,688 $7,286,444 2041 ($185,591) $100;933 $3,274,231) ($3,560,755) ($7,801 467 2042 $198,395 $107,896 $3,500,111 x$3,806,402 $8,339,667 2043 $211,774 $115,173 $3,736,155 $4,063,102 $8,902,086 2044 ($225,756) $122,777 $3,982,821 $4,331,354 $9,489,815 2045 $240,367 $130,723 $4,240,587 $4,611,677 $10,103,991 2046 $255,635 $139,026 ($4,509,952 $4,904,613 $10,745,802 2047 ($271,590) ($147,704 $4,791,440 $5,210,734 $11,416,500 2048 $288,264 ($156,771) ($5,085,593 $5,530,628 $12,117,374 2049 $305,687 $166,247 ($5,392,984) ($5,864,918 $12,849,790 2050 $323,895 $176,150 $5,714,208 $6,214,253 $13,615,166 2051 $342,922 $186,497 $6,049,886 $6,579,305 $14,414,982) 2052 $362,806 $197,311 $6,400,670 $6,960,787 $15,250,792 2053 $383,584 ($208,611 $6,767,239 $7,359,434 $16,124,210 Total $5,341,782 $2,905,114 $94,240,524 $102,487,420 $224,545,634 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Please refer to the explanation of the schools funding in the preceding section Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 42 Table 15 shows the projected increased revenue to the taxing jurisdictions after tax increment proceeds are projected to be terminated. These projections are for FYE 2054. Table 15—Additional Revenues Obtained after Termination of Tax Increment Financing Tax Rewnue in 1.YE2054(year after exl�ration) Froin Froren Taxin2 District I a%Rale Base From Licess Value I otal General Gmernment Washington County 2.2484 $ 966,036.00 $ 3,391,904.00 $ 4,357,940.00 City of Tigard 2.5131 $ 1,079,766.00 $ 3,791,227.00 $ 4 870 993.00 TVFR 1.5252 $ 655 310.00 $ 300,895.00 $ 2.956,205.00 Port of Portland 0.0701 $ 30,119.00 $ 105,752.00 $ 135,871.00 Metro 0.0151 $ 6,488.00 $ 22 780.00 $ 29 268.00 Ti ardlrualatin Aquatic District 0.0900 $ 38,669.00 $ 135,773.00 $ 174 442.00 Subtotal 6.4619 $ 2,776,387.00 $ 9,748 330.00 $ 12 524 719.00 FAwatioo PCC 0.28281$ 121,506.00 $ 426 628.00 $ 548134.00 NW Regional ESD 0.15381 $ 66 081.00 $ 232,020.00 $ 298,101.00 Tigard-Tualatin SD 4.9892 $ 2,143,635.00 $ 7,526 636.00 $ 9,670,271.00 Tigard-Tualatin SD 00 Bond 0.0000 $ - $ - $ - Subtotal 5.4258 $ 2,331,222.00 $ 8,185 .00 $ 10 516 506.00 Total 11.8877 S 5,107,610. 0 IS 17 933,615.00 S 23,041,225.00 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 43 X. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY LIMITS ON ASSESSED VALUE AND SIZE OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA State law limits the percentage of both a municipality's total assessed value and the total land area that can be contained in an urban renewal area at the time of its establishment to 15%for municipalities over 50,000 in population. As noted below, the frozen base(assumed to be FYE 2017 values), including all real,personal,personal,manufactured, and utility properties in the Area, is projected to be$429,654,966. The total assessed value of the City of Tigard, minus excess value of the city's existing urban renewal area is $5,875,954,608.Excess value is the assessed value created above the frozen base in an urban renewal area. The total urban renewal assessed value of the two urban renewal areas is 8.49%of the total assessed value of the city,minus excess value,which is below the 15%statutory limitation. The Area contains 547.9 acres, including public rights-of-way, and the City of Tigard contains 8,129 acres. After accounting for the acreage in the city's other urban renewal area, 9.12 %of the city's acreage is in an urban renewal area,which is below the 15%statutory limitation. Table 16—Urban Renewal Area Conformance with Assessed Value and Acreage Limits Assessed \'aluc I'R Excess Act —,e i City of Tigard $5,907,591,736 8,129 City of Tigard minus Urban Renewal UR excess $5,875,954,608 Existing Tigard City Center UR Area $69,207,378 $31,637,128 193.71 Proposed Tigard Triangle UR Area $429,654,966 547.90 City Center and Tigard Triangle UR Areas $498,862,344 741.61 Percentage in UR Areas 8.49% 9.12% Source:Compiled by Elaine Hov.ard Consulting,LLC with data from City of Tigard and Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) XI. RELOCATION REPORT There is no relocation report required for the Plan.No specific acquisitions that would result in relocation benefits have been identified;however,there are plans to acquire land for infrastructure which may trigger relocation benefits in the future in the Area. Report on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 44 EXHIBIT C City of Tigard Memorandum To: Mayor John Cook and Members of Council From: Cahsta Fitzgerald,President of Tigard Planning Commission Re: Planning Commission Recommendation on Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Date: November 15,2016 On November 14, 2016, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan). After considering the staff report and public testimony, the Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation that City Council approve the Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 457 governing urban renewal, the Planning Commission found that the Plan conforms to the city's goals and objectives as contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the community's vision for the area as described in the recently completed Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan. One member of the public,Jim Long, requested that the Planning Commission recommend that City Council expand the proposed Plan boundary to include property adjacent to and north of the proposed boundary for potential future development as a neighborhood park. The proposed expansion area includes three lots totaling 1.54 acres that are zoned Professional Commercial and contain single-family uses. See the attached map showing the proposed Plan boundary and the lots in question (Tax Lots 1S136ACO2200, 02400, and 02500 at the northwest corner of SW 72nd Ave and SW Spruce Street)). The Planning Commission made and passed a motion 5—4 in favor of asking City Council to consider Mr. Long's request during the City Council hearing on the Plan. Staff explained that Mr. Long served on the Citizen Advisory Council (CAC) for the development of the Plan and also made this request during the last CAC meeting in October. CAC members discussed the proposal at length and ultimately rejected it with a vote of 6 —2. Staff will provide a copy of the CAC meeting notes to City Council for their consideration. Page 11 Planning Commission Recommendation Proposed Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Area Boundary Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area {fit H r ■ ■ • :r Lots Subject-of ■ Boundary..■,...,■�■«,,...: Expansion Request ■ ■ •��� Sw Dartmouth St t' + [.—,ITJLJ il L .LJ a stv 4 frj� ■ LL s ■ L x� ■ i ■ 1*447ker R ♦ w t 1111 w ♦ `�>>�17� ,V�I` ■ 'jf}w♦♦'Q�C ; ■ 1 ■ � tit � jli ■■■ * ■ 'S w Tigard Triangle URA ♦�'y?>> •■■■o 0 500 1,000 feet i i 1 a�aq �e Page 2 1 Planning commission Recommendation CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16-AY AN ORDINANCE AIAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED WHEREAS, the Tigard City Center Development Agency (the "Agency', as the duly authorized and acting urban renewal agency of the City of Tigard, Oregon,is proposing to undertake certain urban renewal activities in a designated area within the City pursuant to ORS Chapter 457;and WHEREAS, the Agency,pursuant to the requirements of ORS Chapter 457,has caused the preparation of the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Plan Amendment'. The Plan Amendment authorizes certain urban renewal activities within the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area (the"Area");and WHEREAS, the Agency has caused the preparation of a certain Urban Renewal Report dated December 13, 2016,attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Report's to accompany the Plan Amendment as required under ORS 457.085(3);and WHEREAS, the Agency forwarded the Plan Amendment and Report to the City's Planning Commission (the "Commission's for review and recommendation. The Commission considered the Plan Amendment and Report on November 14, 2016 and made a recommendation that the Plan Amendment conformed with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,attached hereto as Exhibit C (the"Planning Commission Minutes';and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2016, representatives of the City met with the Washington County Board of Commissioners to review the Plan Amendment, including proposed maximum indebtedness for the Plan Amendment;and WHEREAS, the Plan Amendment and the Report were forwarded on October 5,2016 to the governing body of each taxing district affected by the Plan Amendment, and the Agency has therefore consulted and conferred with each taxing district;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council (the"City Council") has not received written recommendations from the governing bodies of the affected taxing districts;and WHEREAS, on November 29,2016 the City caused notice of the hearing to be held before the Council on the Plan Amendment,including the required statements of ORS 457.120(3), to be mailed to registered voters within Tigard's incorporated limits;and WHEREAS, on December 13, 2016 the City Council held a public hearing to review and consider the Plan Amendment, the Report, the recommendation of the Tigard Planning Commission, and the public testimony received on or before that date and to receive additional public testimony; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the record presented through this date, the City Council does by this Ordinance desire to approve the Plan Amendment. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 1 SECTION 1: The Plan Amendment complies with all requirements of ORS Chapter 457 and the specific criteria of 457.095(1) through (7),in that,based on the information provided in the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation, and the public testimony before the City Council:- 1. ouncil:1. The process for the adoption of the Plan Amendment, has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 457 of the Oregon Revised Statutes; 2. The area designated in the Plan Amendment as the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area is blighted,as defined by ORS 457.010(1) and is eligible for inclusion within the Plan Amendment because of conditions described in the Report in the Section "Existing Physical, Social, and Economic Conditions and Impacts on Municipal Services",including the existence of inadequate streets, trails, sidewalks,parks, and utilities,and a prevalence of depreciated values resulting from underdevelopment and underutilization of property within the Area (ORS 457.010(1)(e)and(g); 3. The rehabilitation and redevelopment described in the Plan Amendment to be undertaken by the Agency is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare of the City because absent the completion of urban renewal projects, the Area will fail to contribute its fair share of property tax revenues to support City services and will fail to develop and/or redevelop according the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 4. The Plan Amendment conforms to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and documented ancillary documents and provides an outline for accomplishing the projects described in the Plan Amendment, as more fully described in the Plan Amendment and in the Planning Commission recommendation; 5. No residential displacement will occur as a result of the acquisition and disposition of land and redevelopment activities proposed in the Plan Amendment and therefore the Plan Amendment does not include provisions to house displaced persons; 6. The acquisition of real property provided in the Plan,including real property in the area that is the subject of this Plan Amendment, is necessary for the development of transportation-related infrastructure improvements in the Area and for the development of public spaces because the Agency does not own all the real property interests (e.g., rights- of-way, easements, fee ownership, etc.) that will be required to undertake and complete these projects as described in Chapter IV of the Plan Amendment and Section V of the Report;and 7. Adoption and carrying out the Plan Amendment is economically sound and feasible in that eligible projects and activities will be funded by urban renewal tax revenues derived from a division of taxes pursuant to section 1c,Article IX of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 457.440 and other available funding as more fully described in the Sections V,VI,t'II, and VIII of the Report 8. The City shall assume and complete any activities prescribed it by the Plan Amendment and 9. The Agency consulted and conferred with affected overlapping taxing districts prior to the Plan Amendment being forwarded to the City Council. ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 2 SECTION 2: The Tigard Urban Renewal Plan Amendment is hereby approved based upon review and consideration by the Tigard City Council of the Plan Amendment and Report,the Tigard Planning Commission recommendations,each of which is hereby accepted,and the public testimony in the record. SECTION 3: The City manager shall forward forthwith to the_agency a copy of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: The .agency shall thereafter cause a copy of the Plan --amendment to be recorded in the Records of Washington County,Oregon. SECTION 5: The City Manager,in accordance with ORS 457.115,shall publish notice of the adoption of the Ordinance approving the Plan Amendment including the provisions of ORS 457.135,in the Tigard Times no later than four days follou ing adoption of this Ordinance. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be effective upon certification by the County Elections Official that it has received voter approval at an election conducted on 160AA I (P—,2017. PASSED: By Gtvote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this 13 day of -DeCombetr ,2016. Kelly Burgo3&,Deputy -R order APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this fft 'day of Dee era k ek**� ,2016. r John ook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attomey Date ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 3 Attachment A Proposed new text is shown in d uble-unde lin ., Deleted text is shown in stiiratigh Explanatory language shown in italics. CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN Only changes shown, current plan can be viewed at: http://www.tip-ard-or.eov/document center/ComniunityDevelopment/urban renewal plan udf I. Introduction The Plan has a duration of 20 years(see Chapter XI),meaning that no new debt will be incurred after Fiscal Year 2025/2026.The maximum amount of indebtedness(amount of tax increment financing for projects and programs)that may be issued for the Plan is Twenty- Two Million Dollars and No Cents($22,000,000). The first substantial amendment was developed in 2016 and went to voters in the Afay 2017 election. It amended the boundary and updated the plan as needed. H. Goals and Objectives No changes to this section III. Outline of projects No changes to this section IV. Map and Legal Description of Urban Renewal Area Map and Legal Description are replaced in their entirety. , . 0 0 0 A L a A IL •. , i ' POINT OF BEGI NNINGy .1 '•K-„�• ` ,, ' 4 1601, - 40 yes ; I r •+ 40 EXHIBIT A CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land in Section 35 Township I South,Range 1 West and Sections 1 and 2 Township 2 South, Range 1 West Willamette Meridian City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. Described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southerly right-of-way of SW Greenburg Road with the southeast line of the John L. Hinklin DLC;thence N 07°41' 55" W a distance of 100.77 feet to the north right-of-way of SW Greenburg Road;thence N 10° 32' 02" E a distance of 419.98 feet; thence S 88° 04' 51"E a distance of 168.91 feet;thence N 46° 34' 35"E a distance of 73.95 feet; thence S 85° 47' 11 E a distance of 190.07 feet; S 02° 45' 30" W a distance of 72.32 feet;thence N 751 18' 06"E a distance of 36.45 feet;thence N 46° 48' 53"E a distance of 173.62 feet; thence N 64° 02" 12"E a distance of 177.40 feet to the westerly right-of-way of SW Hall Blvd.; thence N 36° 35' 04"E a distance of 83.84 feet to the easterly right-of-way of SW Hall Blvd.; thence N 64° 31' 19"E a distance of 148.06 feet; thence S 26° 03' 02" E a distance of 160.00 feet; thence N 64° 17' 30"E 148.04 feet to the southerly right-of-way of Highway 217;thence S 350 21' 18"E, along said highway, a distance of 171.44 feet;thence S 42° 33' 04"E, along said right-of-way,a distance of 99.48 feet;thence S 26° 55' 45"E, along said right-of-way, a distance of 225.54 feet to the northerly right of way of Highway 99 W;thence S 33° 05' 43"E,to the southerly right-of-way of Highway 99 W and the west line of Highway 217 a distance of 127.63 feet; thence S 18° 46' 14"E,along said right-of-way, a distance of 157.53 feet; thence N 79° 41' 28"E, along said right-of-way, a distance of 57.29 feet to an angle point on an offset spiral curve; thence along said right-of-way, S 33° 44' 44" E a distance of 221.73 feet(spiral curve chord);thence S 52° 02' 57"E. along said right-of-way, a distance of 315.25 feet; thence S 411 09' 43"E,along said right-of-way,a distance of 302.54 feet;thence S 33° 34' 36"E, along said right-of-way, a distance of 703.90 feet to the north line of the Wm. Graham D.L.C. and the southeast corner of Lot 2 Crow Park 217;thence N 81° 39' 34"W, along the south line of Crow Park 217,a distance of 963.07 feet to the northwest corner of said Wm. Graham D.L.C. and an angle point in said Lot 2; thence N 79° 02' 14"W, along said south line of Crow Park 217, a distance of 506.40 feet to the northeast corner of Lot 1 Knoll Acres; thence S 00° 42' 32"W, along the easterly line of Lots 1,2, 3, &4 Knoll Acres, a distance of 407.90 feet to the northeast corner of Lot 5 Knoll Acres;thence S 30° 16' 07" W, along the easterly line of said Lot 5,a distance of 149.08 feet to the northerly-right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street;thence S 481 40' 12" W a distance of 85.64 feet to the intersection of the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street with the easterly right-of-way of SW Hall Blvd.;thence N89° 25' 34"E, along the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street, 27.85 feet to an angle point; thence S 59° 29' 34" E a distance of 261.39 feet to the west line of Deed Doc.No. 89-14950, Washington County Deed Records(as depicted on SN 25,383);thence S 30° 30' 24" W, along last said west line a distance of 216.56 feet;thence N 59° 28' 54" W a distance of 120.00 feet;thence N 30° 27' 59" E a distance of 100.00 feet;thence N 59° 29' 34" W a distance of 133.60 feet; thence N 89° 17' 28" W a distance of 24.63 feet to the center line of SW Hall Blvd;thence along the center line of SW Hall Blvd. the following nine (9) courses;thence S 00°42' 32" W a distance of 35.34 feet to a point of curve of a curve to the right; thence along said curve to the right with a radius of 163.70 feet, a central angle of 44° 01' 33" (a chord which bears S 22° 43' 19" W, 122.71 feet) and a length of 125.79 feet to a point of tangency;thence S 44°44' 05"W a distance of 455.02 feet to a point of curve of a curve to the left;thence along said curve to the left with a radius of 179.05 feet, a central angle of 42° 08' 24"(a chord which bears S 23° 39' 53" W, 128.74 feet) and a length of 131.69 feet to a point of tangency; thence S 02° 35' 41"W a distance of 510.56 feet to a point of curve of a curve to the left; thence along said curve to the left with a radius of 190.99 feet,a central angle of 40° 59' 58"(a chord which bears S 17° 54' 18"E, 133.77 feet) and a length of 136.67 feet to a point of tangency; thence S 38°24' 17" E a distance of 62.89 feet to a point of curve of a curve to the right;thence along said curve to the right with a radius of 190.99 feet, a central angle of 40° 07' 28" (a chord which bears S 18° 20' 33"W, 131.03 feet) and a length of 133.75 feet to a point of tangency; thence S 01'43' 11" W a distance of 704.79 feet;thence N 88° 16' 45"W a distance of 35.01 feet to the northeast corner of Parcel l Partition Plat 1992-069 on the westerly right-of-way of SW Hall Blvd;thence along the northerly and westerly lines of said Partition Plat the following 7 courses; thence N 191 59' 47" W a distance of 36.96 feet;thence N 770 33' 03" W a distance of 39.55 feet; thence N 68° 35' 31" W a distance of 63.16 feet;thence S 890 17' 05" W a distance of 56.25 feet; thence N 811 13' 33" W a distance of 92.73 feet;thence S 36° 40' 28" W a distance of 116.84 feet;thence S 57° 58' 03" W a distance of 43.20 feet;thence N 770 47' 58" W a distance of 110.95 feet;thence S 02° 30' 20"W a distance of 422.27 feet to the northerly right-of-way of SW Omara Street;thence N 87° 45' 14" W, along the northerly right-of-way, a distance of 19.65 feet; thence S 03° 57' 44"W, along the westerly right-of-way of SW Omara Street a distance of 24.61 feet and a point on a non-tangent curve to the right;thence along said curve to the right with a radius of 145.90,a central angle of 67° 12' 06" (a chord which bears N 28° 27' 10"W, 161.48 feet)and a length of 171.12 feet to a point of tangency; thence N 05° 09'l 5"E a distance of 10.48 feet;thence N 87° 56' 13" W a distance of 189.71 feet to the west line of Chelsea Hill;thence N 05° 09' 16" E, along the easterly line of Chelsea Hill a distance of 219.78 feet to the northeast corner of Lot 10 Chelsea Hill; thence N 640 24' 41" W,along the northerly line of said Lot 10, a distance of 74.22 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 10; thence S 49° 33' 17" W, along the westerly line of said Lot 10, a distance of 89.36 feet to the south west corner of said Lot 10 and a point on a non- tangent curve to the left;thence along said curve to the left with a radius of 140.02, a central angle of 73° 14' 45"(a chord which bears N 77° 04' 28" W, 167.06 feet)and a length of 179.00 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 27 Chelsea Hill;thence N 60° 54' 15" W,along the easterly line of said Lot 27, a distance of 149.70 feet to the northeast corner; thence S 761 32' 45" W, along the northerly line of Lots 27 and 28 Chelsea Hill, a distance of 90.00 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 27 being on the northerly line of Chelsea Hill No. 2;thence N 41'41' 53" W a distance of 365.61 feet to the southeasterly line of Duck Creek Homes; thence along the southeasterly and the northeasterly line of Duck Creek Homes the following 5 courses;thence N 441 27' 43"E a distance of 50.76 feet;thence N 25° 06' 01"W a distance of 73.15 feet;thence N 05° 03' 58"E a distance of 40.00 feet;thence N 66° 13' 57"E a distance of 18.50 feet;thence N 42°08' 14" W a distance of 112.77 feet to the northwest corner of Duck Creek Homes;thence N 44°27' 43"E a distance of 20.57 feet;thence N 45° 36' 55"W a distance of 359.09 feet to the northwesterly right-of-way of SW Ash Avenue;thence S 44° 27' 43"W, along said northwesterly right-of-way of SW Ash Avenue, a distance of 258.18 feet to the southwest line of Lot 9 Burnham Tract;thence N 42° 08' 14" W a distance of 380.48 feet to the most westerly corner of said Lot 9;thence N 50° 24' 52"E, along the northwest line of said Lot 9, a distance of 143.90 feet; thence N 42° 59' 15" W a distance of 821.63 feet,more or less,to the southeasterly right-of-way of SW Main Street, being a point on a non-tangent curve to the right;thence along said curve to the right with a radius of 1,870.00 feet, a central angle of 60 35' 46" (a chord which bears N 55° 58' 35"E,215.15 feet) and a length of 215.28 feet; thence N 59° 16' 28"E, along said southeasterly right-of-way, a distance of 202.32 feet to a point of non-tangent curve to the left;thence along said right-of-way and said curve to the left with a radius of 180.29 feet, a central angle of 19° 44' 52" (a chord which bears N 78° 43' 27"E, 61.83 feet) and a length of 62.14 feet;thence N 52° 43' 34" W a distance of 231.87 feet to the intersection point of the northwesterly right-of-way of HWY 99 W with the northerly right-of-way of SW Johnson Street; thence N 55°27' 12"W, along said northerly right-of-way of SW Johnson Street, a distance of 219.79 feet to the northwest line of Lot 53,Amended Plat of North Tigardville Addition; thence N 421 05' 45"E, along said northwest line of Lot 53, a distance of 645.17 feet to the westerly line of a Greenway Dedication as per Document No. 92014958, Washington County Deed Records;thence along said westerly line of Greenway Dedication the following four courses; thence S 32° 56' 44"E a distance of 40.58 feet;thence S 031 52' 52" E a distance of 85.60 feet; thence S 0° 32' 56"E a distance of 59.64 feet; and thence S 07° 33' 33"E a distance of 151.19 feet to the northwesterly right-of-way of HWY 99 W; thence along said northwesterly right-of- way of HWY 99 W the following 5 courses;thence N 44° 08' 14"E a distance of 48.33 feet; thence N 07° 33' 33"W a distance of 27.78 feet;thence N 46° 23' 16" E a distance of 366.71 feet; thence N 49° 49' 08"E a distance of 29.37 feet;thence N 51° 23' 28"E a distance of 295.46 feet to the southerly right-of-way of SW Tigard Street;thence N 62° 37' 00" W, along the southerly right of way of SW Tigard Street,a distance of 20.82 feet;thence N 46° 55' 01"E, along the southerly right of way of SW Tigard Street, a distance of 11.00 feet to a point 20.00 feet south of the center line of SW Tigard Street;thence N 49° 55' 59" W,parallel with and 20.00 feet from the center line of SW Tigard Street(when measured at right angles), a distance of 99.33 feet;thence N 62° 33' 24" W,parallel with and 20.00 feet from the center line of SW Tigard Street(when measured at right angles), a distance of 820.72 feet to a point at the extension of the westerly right-of-way;thence N 36° 24' 01"E a distance of 240.58 feet to the point of intersection of the northerly right-of-way of SW Commercial Street, 30.00 feet from the center line of SW Commercial Street(when measured at right angles), with the extension of the westerly right-of-way of SW 95th Ave;thence S 62° 32' 35"E,parallel with and 30.00 feet from the centerline of SW Commercial Street(when measured at right angles), a distance of 594.81 feet to the east right-of-way of SW Lincoln Avenue to a point on a curve to the left; thence along said curve to the left with a radius of 9.49 feet, a central angle of 100°21' 02"(a chord which bears S 14° 53' 25"E, 14.57 feet; and a length of 16.61 feet to the northerly right-of-way of SW Commercial Street; thence S 61°24' 10"E, along said northerly right-of-way, a distance of 187.19 feet; thence S 55° 11' 17" E, along said northerly right-of-way, a distance of 54.14 feet; thence S 51° 43' 30"E, along said northerly right-of-way, a distance of 153.60 feet to the southeast line of the John L. Hinklin DLC; thence N 46°44' 38" E,along said Hinklin DLC line, a distance of 1204.91 feet to point of beginning. Total area equals 231 acres, more or less. V. Urban Renewal Projects No changes to this section VI. Relationship to Local Objectives B. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies (Comprehensive Plan has been updated since original City Center Urban Renewal Plan adoption) Polie),9.41 The City ShaW fiparian habitat and_.. „trrlli., n .-1 h, efij' th.,t f stand' ng n e, fflai .tamed to the maximum extent possible. spare,Peliey 9.54 , and pfesei=ve FOSO WS.. Poky 3.54 The!'pity has design ted the 100 Veal Fleadplain of L`anne Greek, its trio ,tffies s and the Tualatifl Rivef as i whieh will be the baekbefle afthe open spaeo system. Where Landfill an&ar-development are allowed @F ftE�aeOHt to the 100 Veal Fleedpl_ain the 0t„shall requite the e sidereti..„„f,1e,l:eet;.,,. of sufficient open 1_e.,a e e F r gFeenway adjoining andwithin the fl.,odpl.,iii Peliey-33:4 G`J' Deli... 2_Z4 NATURAL RESOURCES AND HISTORIC AREAS, Goal 11:Protect natural resources and the environmental and ecological functions thgv provide, and to the extent feasihle,restore natural resources to create naturally functioning Uykim and high levels ofbiodiversity. Policy 7: The City shall protect and restore riparian and upland habitats to the maximum extent feasible on public and private lands. Goal 5.2:Promote the preservation and protection ofhistorically and culturally ckah2ant resources. The Plan identifies Parks,Public Spaces and Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities projects, including but not limited to the Fanno Park Improvements,Urban Creek/Green Corridor and Urban Green Spaces projects,which will further the Comprehensive Plan's Natural Areas policy objectives. In addition to preserving and upgrading existing parks and natural areas such as Fanno Creek Park,the Plan will facilitate the creation of"green"amenities and pedestrian/bicycle facilities that will provide new active and passive recreational opportunities for residents,downtown workers and visitors and improve connectivity between downtown and adjacent neighborhoods. Pelie.), the feeal point fef eemmemial,high density Fesidential,business,eA,ie and ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 9.1.Develop and maintain a stronn.divercitied. and suctainahle local economy. Policy 1: Zhe City shall establish strategies to retain and encourage the growth QfaictinQ businesses. Policy S• The City shall Promote well-desiened and efcient development and redevelopment ofvacant and underutilized industrial and ommercial lands. One of the Plan's stated goals is to"Promote high quality development of retail,office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape,transportation, recreation and open space investments."The Plan identifies intersection improvements, such as the Hall Blvd/99 W Intersection Improvements project,road widening and realignment projects and other street projects that will improve circulation and access in and around downtown. In addition,the Plan authorizes streetscape projects and pedestrian/bicycle improvements that will make downtown safer and more accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists by filling in gaps in the existing sidewalk system,providing new or upgraded bike lanes,and establishing new multiuse trails and pedestrian crossings. Finally, the Plan includes parks,public spaces and public facilities projects that will make downtown a more appealing place to do business and facilitate the transition of existing industrial and auto-oriented uses to locations outside of the Central Business District. Peliey 6.14 residential r ♦ Kffiees and fent levels. HOUSING Goal 10,1: Provide opporMnities t"nr a yar&kg afhgoino tyn_vs to meet the diverse housinP needs of current and feature Q&residents. Policy 1. The City shall adopt and maintain land use policies codes and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety ofhousing types that meet the needs preferences. and fnancial capabilities of Tigard s present and future residents. Policy 5• The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in areas such as town centers (Downtown) regional centers (Washington Square) and alone transit corridors whae emntoyment opportunities commercial services._tt•ansit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or plannerfor in the fittur - In addition to financing the programs described in Section 1V, the Plan includes public improvements projects that will make the Area a more attractive and viable location for new,high quality medium- and high-density residential development in downtown Tigard. Poky 8.14 pede D�.W�v4'r', 1 7 r-vrrcc e ifleOfffratiflg R11 Modes of medes) b�' e > > >tFuek and auto n b. n di_ ti _ with Tri fnet, d/ J .,*leo,•tffifiSit.,rre ,ide fs ng Tigard, e trails;d. Censtr-uetien of sidewalks on all streets within Tigafd- All Seheels,PaFIES, eefineetio 's; d Poky8.�4 C+ e t, aehieve a safe t,.n ,,..+nt:. stem by the do ei nt of St. of L d ds management«,s.1;n:es and speed een+«els when s .,stfuet;n.. + t and h.,making street f ntenenne� rits,and though n «ehensi.,e > h Designof and serufe edesain and bikeways between «6&Rd_othef st'..:ty eenme in Tio_erd- eir-oul-ation: and out of then ghbe(heeds Dr-olie), vzT The Git.,shell plan F a nfe nd of e ..t street and faadway system Poky 8.3A a.Meets the needs of hs.t44 the current and n eeted foo the T:.tn«d n nit..• h Add es the a nl needs of n transit depeRdent population; e.Ded....es pollution and t..nff;n• and > Polie), 8.3-.2 The Git�,shall eneeurage the expansion and use of publie transit byi e and tf:anspef4atien disadvantaged, -8.5.4 The Git, shall 1e n+e bieyeWpedestfian eeffidefin a manmeF .,hinh provides feF TRANSPORTATION Goal 12.3. Provide an accessible,multi-modal_transnortation .cvctem that meets the mobility needs ofthe community. Podicv 4• The City shall support and prioritize bicycle, pedestrian. and transit improvements for transportation disadvanta esd populations who may be dependent on travel modes other than private automobile. PoliCy 6• The City shall require development adjacent to transit routes to provide direct pedestrian accessibility. Policy R• The City shall design all praiects on Tigard city streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. Goal 12.4:Maintain and imnroye transportation system safety. Policy 2• The City shall coordinate with appro riP ate agencies to provide safe. secum connected and desirable pedestrian bicycle and public transit facilities. In conjunction with proposed street improvements,the Plan provides for new bike lanes and sidewalks as well as upgrades to inadequate bicycle and pedestrian facilities.These projects will increase multimodal access and circulation throughout the Area.Further,to improve neighborhood livability and create a visually appealing streetscape environment that draws residents and visitors to downtown and promotes more active commercial, recreation and entertainment uses,landscape improvements,street trees,street furniture and other streetscape improvements are identified as key components of the Plan. Pokey 144 pelisy 11.4.4 Require 4hat all dove 1 epff tent P eFffli U-6-1 d-044 A W-A-a-Af eas be desigRe d to feei N SPECIAL PLANNING AREAS-DOWNTOWN Goal 141• The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the communiV that is nedectrian oriented,accessible by many moes of transportation,recae izes natural resgureec as an asset.and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work nlav and-Shan in an envjro►rment that is uniquely Goal 15.2:Facilitate the development of an urban village. Policy 5: Downtown design. development and provision shall emphasize public saf tv accessibility. and attractiveness as primary objectives. Goal 15,4:Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles,sVrlec,a d transit. Policy 1: The downtown shall be served by a complete array ofmulti-modal transportation services including auta transit, bike, and edestrian facilities. Policy treetscape and public area desjgn shall focus on creatine a pedestrian iendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. Proposed pedestrian and bicycle improvements, such as the Commuter Rail Access and Tigard Street/Grant Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing projects, will provide safe and convenient pedestrian access to local shops and transit. In addition, streetscape improvements along Main Street,Burnham Street,Commercial Street and other Area roadways will make downtown a more accommodating,pedestrian-oriented commercial district than it is today. Lastly, public facilities projects such as the Performing Arts Center and Public Market will generate support for new and existing businesses that provide entertainment and recreational options for downtown visitors. Plan ,de..:,.., e.,.d .. .,�r�„et tfanspaf4.>tioa f eiiiiies in a P9iie),2 C.,ee„«efe pedestrian a sibiiit„by ffeviding safe, and desirable pedestrian routes. Ge.,l 7. B„lanee.d.T aR e.-tetiOf1 Syste,,, transpaFt.,tion(including mote fyehiele eyee pe.deeFa, ..ansit And , h; i , ti ,t other- s) the Fault: pufpese et..re_efthe et..eet right of. f«„t:l;ty>pedestrian, > h;eyele t..e..e;t t,.....L and auto, within Tigard eansisient with the girayele Master Plan(with ee"s4uetien Policy 4 Sidewalks must he a „etmete.d o ail stfeets within Tigard(with ..st.-„et;�... ., Assn-„etion..E;eet1.1 AN sehoele afks „hl:e f°;lige.,and retail afeas shell he.,e .direet„ s to ., sidewalk. Goal 3-. Safety St.' , arehieve f tfansportation stem by develeping st fee4 srcmcarvT-izcccssirmixagcu management cp v ri c..,,,and speed ............. ......n eqnst+tieting st. t. by....,k:..g si feet.,, nienc a pFiefity_„ted thio O between fks and other- nt'v:t„ entorc.T' d :6c"n'cr Goal 5: Aeeessibility adequa4e e—Jr-epul—lati-en in and out of the nei0bor-heeds, 1 .idefBF off e .,t fn .,t of goods a j Poky 1 DesigH m4efial routes,[:�ghway aeeess and adjaeont land uses in ways that fae442A@ the effiraient mevement of goods and seFvie C. Transportation System Plan Goals and Policies TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Goal 12.2: TralMortation Fffa i.ncv-Develop and maintain a transportation system for the of lent movement-of people and gaodc. Policy 4- The city shall desiZu arterial routes highway access, and adiacent land uses in ways that facilitate the efcient movement ofpeople. goods, and services. Goal 12.3:Multi-modal Transportation System-Provide an accessible.multi-modal tranWortatinn Estem that meets the mobility needs of the community. Policy S• The city shall require development adiacent to transit routes to provide direct pedestrian accessibility. Policy ': The city shall desien all miects on Tigard city streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. Goal 12,4: Safe Transportation system-Maintain and improve transportation system Policy 2 The city shall coordinate with appropriate agencies to provide safe. secure. connected and desirable pedestrian bicycle and public transit facilities The Plan includes streetscape improvements and bicycle/pedestrian system improvements designed to encourage alternative modes of transportation to the automobile. By filling gaps in the existing sidewalk system, installing new bike lanes and upgrading existing bikeways to standard,the Plan will help create a complete system of bicycle and pedestrian facilities that enables pedestrians and bicyclists to commute safely and efficiently to and within downtown. The Plan includes street improvements that will address motor vehicle needs in and around downtown Tigard. Projects such as the Scoffins Street/Hall Boulevard/Hunziker Realignment and Highway 99W intersection improvements will reduce congestion and improve circulation while creating a safer environment for drivers,pedestrians and bicyclists. D. City of Tigard Park System Master Plan .GORtribute.-to aver-all a nit., liy bil:t..and pfid , Balanees the impaets,of gr- ..tl, and inefeasing dens t„ with Fk and gf eenspaees reer-eatieFiFesetif:ees, eefAffitifiity destinations, and fieighbefheed . .ith t....:1s and gFeeRIA'a)'S-, o n' Dfeyides equitable distribution of paFlEs and r patien e ,..4unities thfou.heat the City; DF.+a.ides s 4a and well maintained .,aFks and feefe.,tion f4eil:ties, ,,„d e D.. Vides f Aae 4,e z:d o ally seund m st of p bli .. » , maiFAeaamee,management,en4i� Of_,».•ti .1. ole a to the Plan .,,,d to the f011O g lZ,•Ln . "Ref,,.y to and o pand_ouistifig pn.lEs to i afk eendii o to , s eo i uD,.., ide t„ ,.t„d IpedestFiaR and bie�lo stem tb.,t links T; des eenter-s"affd "Mitigate the off ets of__deyel.,pmeat by p ,iding pocket.,afks efban plazas in eemmefeia1 afeas.n PARKS RECREATION TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE Goal 8.2: Create a Citywide network of interconnected on-and off-roadnodostr�an and bia&trails. Policy 1: The City shall create and interconnected regional and local system ofon-and off- road trails and Baths that link together neighborhoods narks oven spaces mains urban activity centers andregional recreational oonortunities utilizing both Dublic nronerty and easements on private r 4x. The Plan includes multiple projects that support the City's park system vision and recommendations.In particular,the Fanno Creek Park Improvements and Enhanced Pedestrian Bridge, Urban Creek/Green Corridor and Urban Green Spaces projects will upgrade and increase multimodal access to existing parks and open space areas and create new green space and recreational areas that will draw residents, shoppers and visitors to downtown Tigard. VII. Proposed Land Uses No changes to this section VIII. Property Acquisition and Disposition No changes to this section IX, Relocation Methods No changes to this section X. Tax Increment Financing of Plan No changes to this section XI. Duration of Plan No changes to this section XII. Future Amendments to Plan No changes to this section Exhibit B Report Accompanying the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment Adopted by the City of Tigard December 13,2016 Ordinance No. 16- Approved by Voters DATE Consultant Team Elaine Howard Consulting,LLC Elaine Howard Scott Vanden Bos Tiberius Solutions LLC Nick Popenuk Rob Wyman ECONorthwest Ali Danko Kate Macfarlane TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1 II. EXISTING PHYSICAL, SOCIAL,AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS ON MUNICIPAL SERVICES..................................................................................................4 III. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF EACH URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE PLAN 15 IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA....................................... 15 V. THE ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF EACH PROJECT AND THE SOURCES OF MONEYS TO PAY SUCH COSTS....................................................................................... 16 VI. THE ANTICIPATED COMPLETION DATE FOR EACH PROJECT ....................... 17 VII. THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES REQUIRED AND THE ANTICIPATED YEAR IN WHICH INDEBTEDNESS WILL BE RETIRED..20 VIII. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN................................................................25 IX. IMPACT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.................................................26 X. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY LIMITS ON ASSESSED VALUE AND SIZE OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA............................................................................................29 XI. RELOCATION REPORT..............................................................................................29 Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment I. INTRODUCTION The Report on the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment(Report)contains background information and project details that pertain to the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan(Plan)Amendment(Amendment). The Report is not a legal part of the Plan, but is intended to provide public information and support the findings made by the City Council as part of the approval of the Plan. The Report provides the analysis required to meet the standards of ORS 457.085(3), including financial feasibility. The format of the Report is based on this statute. The Report documents not only the proposed projects in the Plan, but also documents the existing conditions in the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area(Area). The Report provides only guidance on how the Plan might be implemented.As the Tigard City Center Development Agency(Agency)conducts its annual budget process each year, it has the authority to make adjustments to the assumptions in this Report,particularly in regards to forecast revenues and planned expenditures. The Agency may allocate budgets differently, adjust the timing of the projects,decide to incur debt at different timeframes than projected in this Report, and make other changes, as allowed in the amendments section of the Plan. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 1 Figure 1 —Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Area with Amendment Properties Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Boundary of Amendment Area SWQ14W •'�. ,. eRw •■•n•I+♦r+• + +% ■ s R W too 0 + e • R • +I A ���•� •► ■ RCI T � f♦ ,4• ■ ■* ;ar,st °♦♦ z • ♦r Mea � ■ r� Boundary of Amendment Area ■■■+ ■ ■ Usting Tigard City Center URA r■■■+ 0 500 1,000 1,500 feet l Source:ECONorthmest Figure 2—Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Area After Amendment Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 2 Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Boundary as Amended • u� • 1 s •s ■ .�► .+r I i 40 eggs a••.= � �'■ter■■•a■•■.rs+,�s + r ♦0 •� yR ■ s -«S •'+ ■ '+• r� �Ad ■ ••++ a�`t ■ a �•+n Sta a � ■ ■ N rr■■r ■ ■ Tigarc!City Center URA *■■■* 0 500 1,000 1,500 feet I I I 1 Source:ECONorthwest Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 3 II. EXISTING PHYSICAL, SOCIAL,AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS ON MUNICIPAL SERVICES This section of the Report describes existing conditions within the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area and the Amendment Area and documents the occurrence of"blighted areas," as defined by ORS 457.010(1). A. Physical Conditions 1. Land Use The existing Tigard City Center Area is 191.22 acres in size,containing 191 tax lots consisting of 147.91 acres. The Amendment area is 37.74 acres in size,containing 7 tax lots consisting of 37.69 acres.After the Amendment the total Area will be 228.96 acres, including 198 tax lots consisting of 185.60 acres and 43.36 acres of right of way for a total of 228.96 acres. An analysis of property classification data for FYE 2016 from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation was used to determine the land use designation of tax lots in the Area as amended. By acreage,commercial use accounts for the largest land use within the area(51.51%).This is followed by exempt(28.11%),and multifamily residential (11.73%). The total land uses of the Area, by acreage and parcel, are shown in Table 1. Table 1 -Existing Land Use of Area Commercial 120 73.16 5 22.45 125 95.61 51.51% Exempt 30 52.18 1 0 0.00 30 52.18 28.11% Industrial 1 6.41 0 0.00 1 6.41 3.45% biuki famfly Residential 10 1 6.68 1 15.10 11 21.78 11.73% SWe Family Residential 18 5.45 0 0.00 18 5.45 2.940/6 Vacant 1 12 4.02 1 1 0.15 1 13 1 4.17 2.25% Total 191 147.90 7 1 37.70 _1__j98_1_185.60 1 100.00% Source:Compiled by Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 4 Z Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations As illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 2,the majority (67.56%)of the Area by acreage is zoned as Mixed Use Central Business District. Table 2-Existing Zoning Designations of Area Mixed Use Central Business District 1 187 125.40 0 0 187 125.40 67.56% M/tJ CBD-Planned Development Overlav 0 0.00 1 15.1 1 15.1 8.14% General Commercial 0 1 0.00 5 21.61 5 21.61 11.64% Parks and Recreation 4 22.50 0 ROO 4 22.50 12.12% Industrial Park 0 0,00 1 0.99 1 0.99 0.53% Total 191 147.90 7 37.70 198 185.60 100.00% Source:Compiled by Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) and Metro RLIS 2016 Ql. As illustrated in Table 3, 67.47%of the acreage is designated as Mixed Use Central Business District in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Table 3-Existing Comprehensive Plan Designations of Area Comprehensive Plan Designation Exislinp LiAsting Xinendment Amendment 'I Otal I otal Percent ol' Mixed Use Central Business District 179 1 110.12 1 1 15.10 180 125.22 67.47% General Commerical 1 0 0.00 1 5 21.61 5 21.61 11.640/a ice 1 12 37.78 1 0 0.00 12 37.78 20360/6 ;LiAM Industrial 0 0.00 1 0.99 1 0.99 0.53% Total 1 191 147.90 7 1 37.70 198 185.60 100.00% Source:Compiled by Tiberius Solutions LLC with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) and Metro RLIS 2016 Ql. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 5 Figure 3—Area Zoning Designations Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Zoning Designations r� Zoning •. ....: . Mixed Use CBD- N+ Planned Development mo•a � - Mixed Use CBD General Commercial Industrial Park Parks and Recreation City Center URA •ame& 0 500 1,000 1,500 feet I I I I Source:ECONorthwest with data from the City of Tigard and Metro RLIS 2016 Q1. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 6 Figure 4—Area Comprehensive Plan Designations Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Comprehensive Plan Designations i O♦ ���■e$4�1f4 ■ •� ��■■#e■ h��RN Comprehensive Plan Mixed Use CBD --- General Commercial Light Industrial Open Space ■ ■ City Center URA •■■■* 0 500 1,000 1,500 feet I I I I Source: ECONorthwest with data from the City of Tigard and Metro RLIS 2016 Q1. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 7 B. Infrastructure This section identifies the existing conditions in the Area to assist in establishing blight. There are projects listed in City of Tigard master plans and Tigard Transportation Systems Plan that identify these existing conditions. This does not mean all of these projects are included in the urban renewal plan. The specific projects to be included in the urban renewal plan are not changed by this Amendment. They are listed in Table 11. 1. Transportation The Tigard Transportation Systems Plan details the transportation needs within the Area. Streets and Intersections There are significant transportation needs within the Area: Table 4—Transportation Needs in the Area DescriptionCost Name Ash Ave railroad Extend Ash Avenue across the railroad crossing(Burnham tracks from Burnham to Commercial Near-term $3,000,000 to Commercial Street Hall Boulevard widening,Pacific Widen to up to 4/5 lanes,depending on Near-term $2,500,000 Highway-to Fanno corridor plan Creek Install a traffic signal at Main Street/Tigard Street.Project need Main Street/Tigard should be reevaluated after Pacific Near-term $350,000 Street Highway/Greenberg Road/Hall Boulevard improvements and Main Street improvements are completed Source:City of Tigard Transportation Systems Plan Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 8 Table 4 Continued—Transportation Needs in the Area Cost Name Description Time Frame Estimate Provide 2 travel lanes,turn lanes where Main Street Green necessary,on-street parking,good Street(Phase Il) sidewalks,and lots of pedestrian-friendly Near-term $2,000,000 amenities on Main Street from the railroad tracks south to Pacific Highway Tigard Transit Provide bicycle hub at Tigard Transit Center bicycle hub Center Near-term $50,000 Convert a segment of inactive railroad Tigard Street Trail right-of-way adjacent to Tigard Street Near-term $1,250,000 from Tiedeman Avenue to Main Street to a multiuse path Commercial Street Install sidewalks on both sides of the Near-term $400,000 street from Main Street to Lincoln Street Source:City of Tigard Transportation Systems Plan 2. Water There are no water needs in the Area. 3. Storm Water There are two storm water projects in the Area: a. 94028—Main Street Storm Rehabilitation (Fanno Creek) Project Need: Upgrade multiple stormwater outfalls in a way that promotes visual appeal in the downtown area. Project Description: The project will upgrade functional stormwater outfalls and abandon inactive stormwater outfalls along Fanno Creek in the vicinity of Main Street. The goal of the project will be to develop a plan for outfall design that improves the aesthetics of downtown Tigard and takes advantages of this well-used location to provide public education about the creek. The plan will develop a vision to be used to attract grant funding. Total Project Cost: $130,000(conceptual planning and grant application only) b. 95042—Commercial Street Sidewalk and Storm Detention Facility(Main to Lincoln) Project Need: Commercial Street currently lacks sidewalks west of Main Street. This project would connect a large residential neighborhood to downtown Tigard and the Tigard Transit Center. Rather high pedestrian volumes are observed despite the lack of adequate pedestrian facilities. Commercial Street is particularly narrow under this reach of the Pacific Highway overcrossing.There is also a lack of sidewalk along Pacific Highway between Naeve Street and Beef Bend Road. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 9 Project Description: This project will construct a sidewalk along one side of Commercial Street from Main Street under the Pacific Highway overcrossing to Lincoln Avenue. The railroad and ODOT may dictate the location of the sidewalk which could result in the roadway being shifted to the southwest so that the sidewalk can be added on the northeast side of the roadway. While the street is under construction, a stormwater facility will be added to treat the stormwater runoff from 47 acres that discharges into Fanno Creek. This project meets outfall retrofitting goals identified in the regional Healthy Streams Plan.A pedestrian path connecting Commercial Street to Center Street and sidewalk along east side of Pacific Highway from Naeve Street to Beef Bend Road will be constructed. This is part of a larger TriMet-managed project to improve access to transit along the Pacific Highway corridor. Total Project Cost: $1,975,000 4. Sewer There is one sanitary sewer project in the Area: 93056—Commercial Street Sanitary Sewer Line Project Need:The sanitary sewer line was constructed in the 1950s and after years of monthly and quarterly cleaning,the pipe walls have become thin. There is also a long sag within the line that requires frequent cleaning. This line is identified in the master plan to be upsized to 12". Project Description: Approximately 358 linear feet of new 12" line will be constructed. Total Project Cost: $135,000. S. Parks and Open Space Fanno Creek Park is the centerpiece of Tigard's downtown redevelopment and revitalization. The park is in the process of being expanded in multiple directions,toward downtown with the upland park and plaza projects and south along the creek past the library. The upland park and plaza area will feature developed gathering and play areas to be implemented along with major redevelopment projects. The floodplain area is a grassy,wooded wetland that provides habitat for a variety of wildlife. The Fanno Creek Park Extension will be developed as a "natural environment"park with open spaces,wetlands, flora and fauna, and limited bridges, boardwalks and soft trails. The new library is located here,as well as a large, meadow field where public gatherings and events can take place. Recommendations for this park include: • Upland Park and Plaza—Continue to follow the recommended"catalyst project" in the Downtown Improvement Plan to recognize and improve a central open space resource and gathering place adjacent to Fanno Creek, supporting a range of passive and active open space and public uses, including a farmers market. The projects and phasing of implementation are described in the Fanno Creek Park&Plaza Master Plan; • Lower Park—In addition to the trail and restoration improvements in the site master plan,the City should consider adding additional local park amenities (play area, picnic site)to serve the area south east of Highway 99 and north of McDonald. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 10 Consider a nature themed play area in this area. Potential locations include in the entrances to the park and Ash street or adjacent to the Senior center; Park Gateway—The master plan also calls for an improved park gateway with a cantilevered deck and a pathway into the park; and C. Social Conditions Data from the US Census Bureau is used to identify social conditions. The geographies used by the Census Bureau to summarize data do not strictly conform to the boundary of the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area.As such,the Census Bureau geographies that most closely align with the Urban Renewal Area boundary are used. The Area is situated at the intersection of seven different Census block groups, each of which extend a great distance beyond the boundary of the Area, including significant residential populations that live adjacent to, but outside of the Area. Within the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area,there are 18 tax lots shown as single- family residential use, and another 11 tax lots with multifamily residential use. Only three of the seven overlapping Census block groups include a significant amount of residential land uses within the Area. Thus,we limit our demographic analysis to those three block groups: block groups 1 and 2 in Census Tract 307 and block group 4 in Census Tract 308.01.These block groups have a total residential population of 3,006 as depicted in Tables 5 and 6. Again,the majority of this population lives in areas adjacent to but outside of the Area. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 11 The majority of the Area, 78%, is White Alone, followed by Some Other Race Alone, 11%. Table 5—Race in the Area Race Nuniber Percent White Alone 2,348 78% Black or African American Alone 59 2% American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 82 3% Asian Alone 67 2% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone 32 1% Some Other Race Alone 336 11% Two or More races 82 3% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates The largest age group in the area is 25 to 34 years,25%,followed by 18 to 24 years and 35 to 44 years, each at 13%. Table 6—Age in the Area Under 5 Years 240 8% 5 to 9 Years 150 5% 10 to 14 Years 103 3% 15 to 17 Years 64 2% 18 to 24 Years 396 13% 25 to 34 Years 737 25% 35 to 44 Years 389 13% 45 to 54 Years 366 12% 55 to 64 Years 243 8% 65 to 74 Years 160 5% 75 to 84 Years 108 4% 85 Years and over 50 2% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 12 A relatively large portion of the adult population in the Area has not achieved a high school diploma, 20%.However, 30%of adult residents in the area have earned a bachelor's degree or higher, another 28%have some college experience without a degree, and an additional 21%have graduated from high school with no college experience. Table 7—Educational Attainment in the Area EducationalNumber Less Than High School 420 20% High School Graduate (includes equivalency) 429 21% Some college 584 28% Bachelor's degree 415 20% Master's degree _ 114 6% Professional school degree 51 2% Doctorate degree 40 2% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates The majority of residents, 64%,travel less than 30 minutes to work, including those who worked at home. Table 8—Travel Time to Work in the Area Travel Time 1.0 "'ork Number 1'3erceni Less than 10 minutes 281 17% 10 to 19 minutes 525 31% 20 to 29 minutes 274 16% 30 to 39 minutes 230 14% 40 to 59 minutes 103 6% 60 to 89 minutes 142 8% 90 or More minutes 56 3% Worked at home 61 4% Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 13 The majority of residents, 58%, drove alone to work. Table 9—Means of Transportation to Work in the Area Means ol'Transportation to Work Drove Alone 971 58% Carpooled 285 17% Public transportation(Includes 206 12% Taxicab Motorcycle 0 0% Bicycle 66 4% Walked 83 5% Other means 0 0% Worked at home 61 4% Total Source:US Census Bureau,Social Explorer,American Community Survey 2010-2014,5-Year Estimates A Economic Conditions 1. Taxable Value of Property within the Area The estimated total assessed value of the Existing Area calculated with data from the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation for FYE 2016, including all real,personal,manufactured,and utility properties, is estimated to be $100,844,506. The estimated total assessed value of the Amendment Area is estimated to be $46,413,073. 2. Building to Land Value Ratio An analysis of property values can be used to evaluate the economic condition of real estate investments in a given area. The relationship of a property's improvement value (the value of buildings and other improvements to the property)to its land value is generally an accurate indicator of the condition of real estate investments. This relationship is referred to as the "Improvement to Land Value Ratio," or"I:L."The values used are real market values. In urban renewal areas,the I:L is often used to measure the intensity of development or the extent to which an area has achieved its short-and long-term development objectives. Table 10 below shows the improvement to land ratios for properties within the Area. The majority of tax lots in the area that are not exempt(41.66%of the total acreage) have I:L ratios of less than 1.0. In other words,the improvements on these properties are worth less than the land they sit on. We identify a target I:L ratio of 2.0 for properties in this Area. Only 31 tax lots in the area, including 16.61%of the acreage have l:L ratios of 2.0 or more in FYE 2016. The Area as a whole, is underdeveloped and not contributing its full potential to the tax base in Tigard. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 14 Table 10-11 Ratio of Parcels in the Area Amend Lilslin Existing Amendment Total Total Perve t (if; ment Acres Taxlots Acres Acres Exempt 30 52.18 0 0.00 30 52.18 28.11% No Improvement Value 13 7.96 1 0.15 14 8.11 4.37% 0.01-0.50 41 25.49 2 5.98 43 31.47 16.96% 0.51-1.00 29 22.25 2 15.48 31 37.73 20.33% 1.01-1.50 25 17.77 0 0.00 25 17.77 9.57% 1.51-2.00 22 7.51 0 0.00 22 7.51 4.05% 2.01-2.50 2 1.04 1 0.99 3 2.03 1.09% 2.51-3.00 9 4.32 0 0.00 9 4.32 2.33% 3.01-4.00 13 8.26 0 0.00 13 8.26 4.45% 4.007 1.12 1 15.10 8 16.22 8.74% Total 191 147.9 7 37.7 198 185.6 100.00% Calculated by Tiberius Solutions LLC with source data from Washington County Office of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016). E. Impact on Municipal Services The fiscal impact of tax increment financing on taxing districts that leve taxes within the Area(affected taxing districts) is described in Section IX Impact of Tax Increment Financing of this Report. This subsection discusses the fiscal impacts resulting from potential increases in demand for municipal services. Since the properties being added in the Amendment are all in the city limits and are now receiving municipal services,there will be no negative impact on municipal services as a result of bringing the properties into the urban renewal area. III. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF EACH URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE PLAN The reason for selecting the Area is to provide additional revenue to enhance the ability to fund improvements necessary to cure blight within the Area. IV. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA This section does not change as there are no new projects. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 15 V. THE ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF EACH PROJECT AND THE SOURCES OF MONEYS TO PAY SUCH COSTS The estimated allocation of funds to specific projects shown in this Report are the best estimates of future expenditures at the time of preparation of the Amendment. The Agency will be able to review and update the allocations on an annual basis when they prepare the annual budget.Nominal dollars are year of expenditure dollars inclusive of inflation, which is assumed to be 3.0%per year. Table 11 —Projects to be Completed Using Urban Renewal Area Funds Projects (nominal$) (constant 2016 S) Potential Saxony Purchase $515,000 $515,000 Saxon demo/clean/prepdemo/clean/prep $525,600 $525,000 Other budgeted projects $223,000 $223,000 Tigard Street Trail Match $154,500 $150,000 Street Improvements $1,800,000 $1,380,000 Streetsca a Improvements $600,000 $533,000 Bike/Ped Facilities $400,000 $355,000 Parks $400,000 $355,000 Public Spaces $2.100,000 $1,866,000 Public Facilities $3,090,000 $2,368,000 Planning.and Development Assistance $2,650,000 $2,278,000 Property Acquisition $4,500,000 $3,998,000 Finance Fees $262,000 $221,000 Total Project Expenditures _ $17,220,100 $14,767,000 Source:Compiled by Tiberius Solutions LLC with input from City of Turd. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 16 VI. THE ANTICIPATED COMPLETION DATE FOR EACH PROJECT The projects will be ongoing and will be completed as directed by the Agency. The Area is anticipated to complete all projects on or before FYE 2026 and have sufficient tax increment finance revenue to terminate the district in FYE 2034. Changes in market conditions could affect the assumed development schedule. Anticipated project completion dates are shown in Table 12. The Agency may change the completion dates in their annual budgeting process or as project decisions are made in administering the urban renewal plan. The first year of tax increment collections for the property being added in the Amendment is FYE 2019. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 17 Table 12-Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars TOTIL 2016-17 2017-18 2018-11) 2019-20 2020-21 Resources Beginning Fund Balance 140,333 66,311 299,306 244,584 44,395 Pay-as-you-go Transfer from TIF Fund $2,732,884 590,119 329,606 198,781 53,588 144,836 Bond/Loan Proceeds $13,100,000 0 0 0 0 8,300 000 Rental Income $741,314 78,157 78,157 95,000 95,000 95,000 Proceeds from Property Sales $0 0 0 0 0 0 Inter ovemmental Revenues $500,000 500,000 Interest Eamings $5,569 702 332 1,497 1,223 222 Total Resources $17,079,767 1,309 11 474,406 594,584 394,395 8,584,453 endltures nominal$) Potential Saxony Purchase ($515,000) -515,000 Saxony demo/clean/pre ($525,600) -505,000 -20,600 Other budgeted projects ($223,000) -223,000 Tigard Street Trail Match ($154,500) -154,500 Street Improvements ($1,800,000) Streetscape Improvements ($600,000) -600,000 Bike/Ped Facilities ($400,000) -400,000 Parks $400,000 -400,000 Public Spaces ($2,100,000) -2,100,000 Public Facilities ($3,090,000 Planning and Development Assistance $2,650,000) -350,000 -350,000 -350,000 Property Acquisition ($4,500,000) -4,500,000 Finance Fees ($262,000) -166,000 Total Expenditures $17,220100 -1,243,000 -175,100 -350,000 -350,000 -8,51(),000 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC with input f orn City of Tigard. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 18 Table 12—Projects and Costs in Year of Expenditure Dollars,page 2 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-2; 202 5-2 6 Resources Beginning Fund Balance 68,453 35,958 28,431 98,915 86,882 Pay-as-you-go(Transfer from TIF Fund) 217,163 292,293 370,342 437,472 98,684 BondALoan Proceeds 0 0 0 0 4,800,000 Rental Income 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 Proceeds from Pro erty Sales 0 0 0 0 0 Intergovernmental Revenues Interest Fermin s 342 180 142 495 434 Total Resources 385,958 428,431 498,915 536,882 4,986,000 Expenditures(nominal$) Potential Sammy Purchase Samn dernolclean' re Other budgeted projects Tigard Street Trail Match Street Improvements -1,800,000 Streets cape Improvements Bike/Ped Facilities Parks Public Spaces Public Facilities -3,090,000 Planning and Development Assistance -350,000 -000,000 -400,000 -450,000 Property Acquisition Finance Fees -96,000 Total nditures -350,000 400,000 400,000 450,000 -4,986,000 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC with input from City of Tigard. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 19 VII. THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES REQUIRED AND THE ANTICIPATED YEAR IN WHICH INDEBTEDNESS WILL BE RETIRED Table 13 shows the allocation of tax increment revenues to debt service and the debt service reserve fund.Table 13 shows no new debt being incurred after FYE 2026, as required by the Plan. It is anticipated that the Agency will have sufficient resources to retire all debt by FYE 2034,which would then allow the Agency to cease collecting tax increment revenues and close down the Area. The time frame for retiring all debt for the Area is not absolute; it may vary depending on the actual terms of the indebtedness incurred,and the actual tax increment revenues received. If the economy is slower, it may take longer to repay all debt; if the economy is more robust than the projections, it may take a shorter time period. The Agency may decide to issue bonds or take on loans on a different schedule,and that will alter the financing assumptions, however the existing Plan prohibits any new debt after FYE 2026. The maximum indebtedness of the Plan is $22,000,000(twenty-two million dollars), and is not being increased by this Amendment. The City of Tigard estimates that$3,244,382 of indebtedness has been incurred by the Agency for the Area to date,through the end of FYE 2016,resulting in$18,755,618 in remaining capacity for additional indebtedness for the Area. Information on scheduled debt service payments for all existing debt was provided by the City of Tigard Finance Department. Additionally,we assume the Agency will undertake two additional loans in future years to finance the costs of projects identified in the Plan. For speculative future borrowings,the amounts,timing, and terms of the debt are unknown. The assumptions used in this Report are for planning purposes only, and subject to change based on market conditions. These assumptions were developed by Tiberius Solutions LLC and informed by conversations with staff from the City of Tigard Finance Department. Specific key assumptions for the financial analysis include: • Debt Service Coverage Ratio: Payments for future indebtedness are structured so that annual tax increment revenues are projected to equal or exceed 1.25 x total annual debt service payments in all years,with one exception. In FYE 2026,final year allowed by the Plan to incur new debt, the projected debt service coverage ratio is reduced to 1.10 to maximize the borrowing potential of the Area. • New Loan FYE 2021: Assumes principal amount of$8,300,000 with 3.0% interest rate, 20-year amortization period, level annual debt service payments, and no prepayment penalties. • New Loan FYE 2026: Assumes principal amount of$4,800,000 with 5.0% interest rate, 20-year amortization period, level annual debt service payments, and no prepayment penalties. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 20 Without the Amendment,the Area is forecast to be able to incur$16,300,000 in indebtedness through FYE 2026, which would be $5,700,000 less than the total maximum indebtedness of the Area. With the Amendment,the Area is forecast to be able to incur$19,100,000 in indebtedness through FYE 2026,which would be $2,900,000 less than the total maximum indebtedness of the Area.Thus,the increased tax increment revenue that will be generated due to the amendment is projected to increase the borrowing capacity of the Area by$2,800,000 through FYE 2026,helping the Agency fund more of the projects identified in the Plan. The assumptions used in this analysis present just one potential scenario for the long-term cash flow of the Area. If actual results differ from these assumptions, it could affect the ability of the Agency to achieve these projects at these dollar amounts on this schedule. Based on these assumptions. we find the Plan Amendment financially feasible. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 21 Table 13 -Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service and Debt Service Reserve Fund 12020-21 DER T.8'ER VICE F IND Resources Beginning Fund Balance 359,791 0 0 212,169 0 TIF for URA $106,092,176.00 397,103 492,519 570,001 637,033 706,659 Total Resources $106,664,136.00 756,894 492,519 570,001 849,202 706,659 Expenditures Debi Servic•- 2014 US Bank Loan $1,268,621.00) -162,842 -158,980 -155,118 -791,681 Loan#5 Sewer ($109,434.11) -512 -512 -512 -512 -512 Loan#5 General Fund $42,904.56 -201 -201 -201 -201 -201 Loan 96 General Fund ($389,352.89) -1949 -1,949 -11949 -1,949 -1949 Loan#7 General Fund ($273,737.25) -1,270 -1,270 -1,270 -1,270 -1,270 2021 New Loan ($11,157,807.46) -557,890 2026 New Loan $3,466,479.7 $0.00 $0.00 Total Debt Service $16,708,337.04 -166,775 -162,913 -159,051 -795,614 -561,823 Co\era e Ratio 2381 3.02 3.58 0.80 1.26 '!Tans erro D S Reserve Fund ($89,743,627.00) -590,119 -329,606 198,781 -53,588 144,836 Total Expenditures ($106,451,964.04) -756,894 1192,519 -357 32 -849,202 -706659 F}idin Fund Balance $0.00 $0.00 5212.169.00 $0.00 $0.00 i 1 Debt Sm-Ire Reserve Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 Interest Earnings 53,954,801.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Transfer from D/SFund 589,743,627.00 $590,119 $329,606 $198781 $53,588 $144836 Total Resources $93,698,428.00 $590 119 $329,606 $198,781 $53,588 $144,836 Expenditures Transfer to Project Fund For URA admin S2,132,884.00 -$590119 -$329,606 -$198,781 -$53,588 -$144,836 Total Expenditures -$590 119 -S329,606 -$198 781 453,588 -S144,836 Ending Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cumulative D'S Remaining -$16,541,565 -$16,378,652 -$16,219,6011 415,423,987 -$14 862 164 TIF Sufficient to Pay OffDlS NO NO NO NO NO Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 22 Table 13-Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service and Debt Service Reserve Fund, page 2 2112 1-22 202-23 2023-24 2024-25 21125-26 2026.27 Resources Bepinning Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0 TIF for URA 778,986 854,116 932,165 1,013,245 1097,480 1,184,991 Total Resources 778,986 854,116 932,165 1,013,245 1,097,480 1,184,991 Egynditurcs Debt Service 2014 US Bank Loan Loan#5 Sewer -512 -512 -512 -10533 -10,533 -10,533 Loan#5 General Fund -201 -201 -201 -4130 -4130 -4130 Loan#6 General Fund -1,949 -1949 -1949 -1949 -37181 -37181 Loan#7 General Fund -1,270 -1,270 2557" 0 -1,270 -1,270 -26,104 2021 New loan -557,890 -557,890 -557,890 -557,890 -557 890 2026 New Loan -385,164 -385,164 Total Debt Service -561,823 -561,823 -561 23 -575 773 -996.169 -1,021,003 Coverage Ratio 1.39 1.52 1.66 1.76 1.10 1.16 Transfer to DIS Reserve Fund -217,163 -292,293 -370,342 -437,472 -101,311 -163,988 Total Ekpendtures -778,986 -854,116 -932165 -1,013,245 4,097,480 -1,184,991 Flydio F1and Balance 60.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2012 4;.2 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 627 Interest Earnings $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13 Transfer from D/SFund $217.163 $292,293 $370,342 $437472 $101,311 $163988 Total Resources 5217,163 $292,293. $370,342 $437,472 5101,311 $1669628 Expenditures Transfer to Project Fund For URA admin -$217,163 -$292,293 -$370,342 -$437,472 -$98,684 $0 Total Expenditures -$217,163 -$292,293 -$370,342 -$437,472 598,684 SO FzKfing F>undBalance SO $0 $0 so $2,627 $166,628 Cumulative D/S Remaining -$14,300_.341 -$13,738,518 -$13,176,695 -$12,600,922 -$11,604,753 -$10.583,750 TIF Sufficient to Pay OffD/S NO NO NO NO NO NO Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 23 Table 13 -Tax Increment Revenues and Allocations to Debt Service and Debt Service Reserve Fund, page 3 2027-28 ZOM29 2029-30 203"1 2031-32 2032-33 2033-34 Resources Beginning Fund Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TIF for URA 1,386,954 1,485,861 1588,629 1,695,414 1,806374 1,921,676 469,458 Total Resources 1,386,954 1 85861 1,588,629 1,695,414 1,806 74 1921,676 469,458 FxptnEfitures DebtSendee 2014 US Bank Loan Loan#5 Sewer -10533 -10533 -10,533 -10,533 -10,533 -10,533 -10,533 Loan#5 GeneralFund A,130 -4130 4,130 4,130 -4130 4130 A.130 Loan 46 Gm eral Fund -37,181 -37,181 -37,181 -37,181 -37,181 -37,181 -37,181 Loan 9'(kn eral Fund -26,104 -26,104 -26.104 -26104 -26104 -26104 -26,104 2021 New Loan -557,890 -557,890 -557,890 -557 890 -557,890 -557,890 -557,890. 2026 New Loan -385,164 -385,164 -385,164 -385,164 -385,164 -385,164 -385,164 ToW Debt SerNice -1021003 -1,021,003 -1,021,003 -1021,003 -1021003 -1021003 -1,021,003 Coverage Ratio 1.36 1.46 1.56 1.66 1.77 1.88 0.46 Transfer to D S Reserve Fund -365,951 464,858 -567,626 -674,411 -785,371 -900,673 551,545 Total Fs nditures -1,386,954 -1 485,861 -1,588,629 -1,695,414 -1,806,374 -1,921,676 -469,458 F}tdirte Fund Balance $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.O0 Senn 2027-28 2028-29 t 2030-31 2031-32 2032-33 2033-34 Resources Beginning Fund Balance $166628 $533,412 51 000,937 $1,573,W 52,255847 53 052497 53,968.432 Interest Earnings 5833 667 $5,005 S7,868 S11,279 $15262 $19,842 Transfer from D'S Fund 5365,951 S464,958 S567,626 $674,411 S785,371 M,673 -S551545 Total Resources $533,412 $1,000.937 $1,573,568 S2,255,847 S3,052,497 $3,968,432 $3,436,729 Expenditures Ttansferto Project Fund For URA admin so $0 s0 so $0 50 s0 Total Eqencbtures $0 $0 s0 $0 s0 so SO Ending Find Balance $533,412 $1,000,937 S1,573,568 S2,255,847 S3,052,497 S3,968,432 $3,436,729 Cuntnulative unai AS Renin -S9 ,747 -S8 541,744 -$7,520,741 $6499,738 SN 53 478,735 -$4,457,732 436.729 TIFSufbcientto offn-sNO NO NO NO NO NO 1FS Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 24 VIII. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN The estimated tax increment revenues through FYE 2034 as shown above,are based on projections of the assessed value of development within the Area and the consolidated tax rate that will apply in the Area. The analysis assumes average annual growth in assessed value of 4.0%for real property, 1.0%for personal and utility property, and 0.0%for manufactured property. These growth rates assume both the appreciation of existing property values and new construction activity in the Area. Additionally, in FYE 2018,the forecast includes an increase in assessed value of$4,877,582 for real property that would be the result of a new 165-unit mixed-use development in the Area that is currently under construction. This increase in value would be on top of the projected 4.0%background growth rate for assessed value of real property in the Area. This increase is based on information provided to the City of Tigard by the developer regarding the total anticipated construction cost of the project. These projections reflect the plans of the developer to take advantage of the State of Oregon Vertical Housing Tax abatement program, which results in 60%of the value of the project being tax exempt for a period of ten years. Table 14 shows the projected incremental assessed value,tax rates and tax increment revenues each year, adjusted for discounts,delinquencies,and compression losses. These projections of increment are the basis for the projections in Tables 12 and 13. The first year the impact of the Amendment would be reflected in the calculation of tax increment revenues is FYE 2019,with an increase in the frozen base value,as well as a corresponding increase in total assessed value of the Area.Gross TIF is calculated by multiplying the tax rate times the excess value. The tax rate is stated per thousand dollars of assessed value, so the calculation is "tax rate times excess value divided by one thousand". The consolidated tax rate includes only permanent rates and general obligation bonds rates approved by voters prior to October 6,2001. In FYE 2017 and 2018 the tax rate is forecast to decrease, due to the expiration of those general obligation bonds. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 25 Table 14-Projected Incremental Assessed Value,Tax Rates, and Tax Increment Revenues Assess;ed Value Frozen Bitse ['acess V lue 'I wt Rate (tross III: Adjustments %'ct'nF (urnuiati%r iv- 2016 $100,844,506 $69,207,378 $31,637,128 12.1668 384,923 19,241) 365,677 365,677 2017 $104,326,036 $69.207,378 $35,118,658 ]1.9026 418,003 1 (20,900) 397,103 762,780 2018 $112,818,927 $69,207,378 $43,611,549 11.8877 518,441 (25,922) 492,519 1,255,299 2019 $167,485,234 $117,012,843 $50,472,391 11.8877 600,001 (30,000) 570,001 1,825,300 2020 $173,420,769 $117,012,843 $56,407,926 11.8877 670,561 33,528) 637,033 2,462,333 2021 $179,586,127 $117,012,843 $62,573,284 11.8877 743,852 37,193 706,659 3,168,992 2022 $185,990,425 $117,012,843 $68,977,582 11.8877 819,985 40,999 778,986 3,947,978 2023 $192,643,144 $117,012,843 $75,630,301 11.8877 899,070 (44,954) 854,116 4,802,094 2024 $199554,145 $117,012,843 L$82,541,302 11.8877 981,226 (49,061) 932,165 5,734,259 2025 $206,733,679 $117,012,843 $89,720,836 11.8877 1,066,574 (53,329) 1,013,245 6,747,504 2026 $214192,409 $117,012,943 $97,179,566 1 11.8877 1,155,242. 57 762 1097 480 7,844 984 2027 $221,941,422 $117,012,843 $104,928,579 11.8877 1,247,359 62,368 1,184,991 9,029,975 2_028 $239_824,845 $117.012,843 $122,812.002 11.8877 1,459,952 (72,998) 1,386,954 10,416,929 2029 $248,582,783 $117,012,843 $131,569,940 1 11.8877 1,564,064 78,203 1,485,861 11,902,790 2030 $257,682,729 $117,012,843 $140,669,886 1 11.8877 1,672,241 (83,612) 1,588,629 1 13,491,419 2031 $267,138,280 $117,012,843 $150,125,437 11.8877 1,784,636 (89,232 1,695,414 15186,833 2032 $27_6,963,577 $117,012,843 $159,950,734 11.8877 1.901,446 , 95,072 1,806,374 16.993,207 2033 $287,173,323 $117,012,843 $170,160,480 11.8877 2,922,817 (101,141 1,921,676 18,914,883 2034 $297,782,813 $117,012,843 $180,769,970 11.8877 2,148,939 1 (107,447)1 2,041,492 2Q956,375 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Notes: TIF is tax increment revenues Tax rates are expressed in terms of dollars per$1,000 of assessed-value. Changes in total tax rates are due to general obligation bonds with variable rates.These bonds are scheduled to be retired in FYE 2017,after which the total tax rate for the area will stabilize as the sum total of all permanent rates for affected taxing districts. IX. IMPACT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING This section describes the impact of tax increment financing of the Amendment(properties being added to the Area), both until and after the indebtedness is repaid, upon all entities levying taxes upon property in the urban renewal area.The impact of tax increment financing on overlapping taxing districts consists primarily of the property tax revenues foregone on permanent rate levies as applied to the growth in assessed value in the Area. These projections are for impacts due to the addition of properties in this Amendment, and are shown in Tables 15a and 15b. This Amendment does not change the maximum indebtedness of the Plan,nor does it change the allowed duration of the Plan to incur indebtedness, and the date to pay off all indebtedness and cease collecting tax increment revenues is anticipated to be the same with and without the Amendment. Therefore,the impact of the Amendment on overlapping taxing districts is measured by the increase in annual tax increment revenues that would be foregone by those districts until all debt is repaid. The Tigard Tualatin School District and the Northwest Regional Education Service District are not directly affected by the tax increment financing,but the amounts of their taxes divided for the urban renewal plan are shown in the following tables. Under current school funding law,property tax revenues are combined with State School Fund revenues to achieve per-student funding targets. Under this system,property taxes foregone, due to the use of tax increment financing, are substantially replaced with State School Fund revenues, as determined by a funding formula at the State level. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 26 Tables l 5a and 156 show the projected impacts to permanent rate levies of taxing districts as a result of this Amendment. Table 15a shows the general government levies and Table 15b shows the education levies. General obligation bonds will not be impacted by this Amendment, because only bonds approved by voters prior to October 6, 2001 are affected by this Plan, and those bonds will have all expired by the time the Amendment is reflected in the calculation of tax increment revenues by the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation, expected in FYE 2019. Table 15a-Projected Impact on Taxing District Permanent Rate Levies- General Government General Govrrument as hington ('itN of Port of TigardlTualatin Countl Ti-vard TV III Portland Metro Aquatic District Pe rm Perm ' erm Perm Perm Perm 'suinow 2019 $6219 ($6,951) ($4,219) ($194) ($42 $249) ($17,874 2020 $10,135 $11,329) ($6,87 ($31 $68 $406) ($29,130 2021 $14,204 ($15,877) ($9,63 ($443) ($96 $569 ($40,825 2022 $18,432 ($20,602) ($12,503) ($575 $123 $738 ($52,973 2023 $22,825 ($25,512) ($15,483) ($712) ($153) ($913 ($65,598 2024 $27,389 ($30,613) ($18,579) ($854) ($184 $1,096 ($78,715 2025 $32,131 $35,913 ($21, $1,002 $216 $I,286 ($92,344 2026 $37,059 $41,421 ($25,138) ($1,156) ($249 $1,484 ($106,507 2027 $42,178 $47,144) ($28,612) ($1,315) ($283 $1,688 ($121,220 2028 $47,499 ($53,091) ($32,221) ($1,481) ($319 $1,901) ($136,512 2029 $53,028 159,271) ($35,972) ($1,653 $3 ($2,122) ($152,402 2030 $58,773 $65,693 ($39,869) ($1,833 $395 $2,352) ($168,915 2031 $64,744 $72,366 ($43,919 $2,019 $435 $2,592 ($186,075 2032 $70,949 ($79,302), ($48,128) ($2,212 $476 ($2,840) $203, 2033 ($77,3 $86,509) ($52,502). ($2,423 $520 $3,098) ($222,439 2034 $84,158 S94,066 1 $57,0891 $2,6245 3,369 S241,872 Total ($498,804)1 $15,554 ($3,349) $1,433,564 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 27 Table 15b-Projected Impact on Taxing District Permanent Rate Levies -Education PCC NWRegional LSD SDI FYE Perm Perm Perm Suttotal Total 2019 $782 ($426) ($13,799) ($15,007) ($32,881) 2020 ($1,275) $694 ($22,490) (($24,459) $53,589 2021 ($1,787) $972 $31,520 ($34,279) $75,104 2022 $2,319 ($1,261) ($40,901) ($44,481 ($97,454 2023 $2,871 $1,561 ($50,648) ($55,080) ($120,678 2024 $3,445 ($1,873 ($60,775) ($66,093) ($144,808 2025 $4,041 $2,198 $71,298 ($77,537) $169,881 2026 $4,661 $2,535 $82,233 $89,429 $195,936 2027 $5,305 $2,885 $93,594 $101,784 $223,004 2028 $5,975 ($3,249) ($105.401) ($114,625 ($251,137 2029 $6,670 ($3,628) ($117,669) ($127,967) ($280,369 2030 ($7,392) $4,020 $130,419 $141,831) ($310,746 2031 $8,144 $4,429 $143,668 $156,241) ($342,316 2032 $8,923 $4,853 $157,436 $171212 $375,119 2033 $9,735 $5,294 $171,744 $186,773 ($409,212 2034 $10,585 $5,757 $186,747 $203,089 444,961 Total ($62,740) $34,121) (($1,106,848) $1 03 709 ($2,07,273)! Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC.Please refer to the explanation of the schools funding in the preceding section Table 16 shows the projected increased revenue to the taxing jurisdictions after tax increment proceeds are projected to be terminated. These projections are for FYE 2035. Table 16-Additional Revenues Obtained after Termination of Tax Increment Financing From I-rimen General Government Washington County 2.2484 $155,606.00 $538,718.00 $694324.00 City of Tigard 2.5131 $173,925.00 $602,140.00 $776,065.00 TVFR 1.5252 $105,555.00 $365,439.00 $470,994.00 Port of Portland 0.0701 $4,851.00 $16,796.00 $21,647.00 Metro 0.01511 $1,045.00 $3,618.00 $4,663.00 Tigard/Tualatin Aquatic District 0.09001 $6,229.00 $21564.00 $27,793.00 Subtotal 6.4619 $447,211.00 $1,548,275.00 $1,995,486.00 Education PCC 0.2828 $19,572.00 $67,759.00 $87,331.00 NVQ"Regional ESD 0.1538 $10,644.00 $36,851.001 $17,495.00 Tigard-Tualatin SD 4.9892 $345,289.00 $1,195,415:,00 $1,540,704.00 Subtotal 5.4258 $375,505.00 $1,300,025. $1,675,53 .00 Total 11.8877 $822,716.00 $2,848 00.00 $3,671016.00 Source:Tiberius Solutions LLC Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 28 X. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY LIMITS ON ASSESSED VALUE AND SIZE OF URBAN RENEWAL AREA State law limits the percentage of both a municipality's total assessed value and the total land area that can be contained in an urban renewal area at the time of its establishment to 25%for municipalities under 50,000 in population. As noted below, the frozen base, including all real,personal,personal,manufactured,and utility properties in the Area after the Amendment, is projected to be$117,012,843. The total assessed value of the City of Tigard, minus excess value of the existing urban renewal areas is $5,875,954,608. Excess value is the assessed value created above the frozen base in the urban renewal area.The total urban renewal assessed value is 9.30%of the total assessed value of the City,minus excess value, below the 25%statutory limitation. The Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area contains 228.96 acres, including right-of-way, and the City of Tigard contains 8,129 acres. After accounting for the acreage in the potential Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area, 9.56 %of the City's acreage would be in an urban renewal area, below the 25%statutory limitation. Table 17—Urban Renewal Area Conformance with Assessed Value and Acreage Limits City of Tigard $5,907,591,736 8,129 City of Tigard minus UR excess $5,875,954,608 Tigard City Center $117,012,843 $31,637,128 228.96 Proposed Tigard Triangle $429,654,966 547.90 City Center Plus Tigard Triangle $546,667,809 776.86 Percentage in UR 9.30% 9.56% Source:Compiled by Elaine Howard Consulting,LLC with data from City of Tigard and Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation(FYE 2016) XI. RELOCATION REPORT There is no relocation report required for the Plan.No specific acquisitions that would result in relocation benefits have been identified,however,there are plans to acquire land for infrastructure which may trigger relocation benefits in the future in the Area. Report on Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area Amendment 29 Exhibit C CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes November 14,2016 CALL TO ORDER President Fitzgerald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Fitzgerald Vice President Feeney Alt. Commissioner Enloe Commissioner Hu Commissioner Jelinek Commissioner Lieuallen Commissioner McDowell Commissioner Middaugh Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Absent: Alt. Commissioner Mooney Staff Present: Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner; Susan Shanks,Associate Planner; Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant;Lauren Scott, Community Engagement Coordinator COMMUNICATIONS—Since President Fitzgerald wasn't present for the original Triangle Medical Office Building PD hearing,it was decided that Vice President Feeney would preside over that portion of the meeting. CONSIDER MINUTES October 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes: President Fitzgerald asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the October 17 minutes; there being none, President Fitzgerald declared the minutes approved as submitted. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 17 TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT- PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR) 2016-00011; SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2016-00007 November 14,2016 Page 1 of 11 REQUEST: The applicant requests concurrent Planned Development Concept Plan and Detailed Development Plan review for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.73- acre vacant parcel located southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking taking access from SW Dartmouth through the eastern access to the adjacent Walmart development. A pedestrian path is proposed through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot. A vegetated corridor along the northern property line is protected and improved. LOCATION: SW of the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street;Washington County Tax Map 2S 101 BA, Tax Lot 00300. ZONES: C-G: general commercial district, with planned development overlay. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Vice President Feeney opened the public hearing. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS Vice President Feeney read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions; there were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: Commissioners Jelinek, Muldoon, Feeney,McDowell, Schmidt, Hu, Middaugh, Lieuallen, and Fitzgerald. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. STAFF REPORT regarding the Concept Plan The staff report is available on-line at the City website one week prior to the hearing. Gary Pagenstecher, City of Tigard Associate Planner,went over the staff report. He recapped what had happened at the previous meeting and distributed a supplemental packet that the applicant had supplied for them (Exhibit A). Regarding process - Gary explained the applicant requests the Concept Plan and Detailed Plan votes be cast at the same hearing for purposes of appeal and noted that this is at the commission's discretion. He reminded them this hearing is a continuation of the Concept Plan and said the applicant requested a straw poll at the end of the Concept Plan deliberation to see whether the commission is comfortable with the applicant's proposal with respect to the 6th criteria. After that, the expectation for tonight would be that they would open the record for discussion of the detailed plan, close the record, and if they're comfortable with both plans they might be able to vote on both at the same hearing. If they're not ready to vote, they could provide direction to the applicant and continue the hearing to a time certain. Additionally, Gary said the representative of Mr. Martin had requested that there be a continuation from the evening's hearing to a time certain with a 7-day open record period - and Gary said he believes the applicant is amenable to that. Gary also noted that he had received electronic comment letters dated 11/14/16 (that will be attached to the next staff report). November 14, 2016 Page 2 of 11 PD purposes consider: weighing the amount of development on a site to balance interests of owner, developer, neighbors, and city; and relating the built environment to the natural environment. The 6 Concept Plan review approval criteria are guidelines,with discretion for the Planning Commission on how outcomes are achieved and even to what level the achievement is expected; This is how staff's CP recommendation to Approve - it comes with a caveat that the Planning Commission may find alternative approaches that better meet the approval criteria. In light of the detailed plan review, staff is asking the Commission to consider concept plan criteria 1 and 6. With respect to Criterion 1: Do the proposed open space areas adequately protect the natural features of the site, or should the applicant find ways to preserve additional vegetated corridor to the north, or step improvements with the grade to improve the project's relationship to SW 72nd Avenue on the east% With respect to Criterion 6: Does the proposed Concept Plan sufficiently protect natural features, or provide additional amenities that enhance the neighborhood that are not otherwise available? An example would be a pedestrian path. These Concept Plan criteria have corollaries with the Detailyd Plan approval criteria,which we will discuss next with the applicant's presentation of revised materials in response to the PC's direction and staff's findings and recommended conditions of approval for the Detailed Plan. POINT OF ORDER Dana Krawzcuk, representing Base Camp I, LLC,made a point of order and clarification: Our understanding was the Concept Plan was being considered on its own and then once that was decided you would turn to the final development plan. Our understanding is the record was closed on the Concept Development Plan and that this evening the commission would first deliberate on only the Concept Plan and then make a tentative vote on that—not finalize that vote—because we are concerned about having dualing appeals proceeding. Once that tentative vote on what you heard last time, and the materials submitted two weeks ago, then we would have a staff report on the Detailed Plan and give our presentation, let anyone else testify and then deal with the Detailed Plan separately. DELIBERATION ON CONCEPT PLAN Vice President Feeney: What are our thoughts on the Concept Plan? We have the option of a tentative vote on the Concept Plan. Fine with the concept plan but still concerned with the 20-foot retaining wall— safety risk and sounds like it may be an eyesore. 0 I have concerns with the natural features. This is the heart of the Triangle • Criteria 1 —I would like more natural vegetation,less parking lot—either under the building or partially under the building • Criteria 6 —Would like to see more done—maybe natural landscape. November 14, 2016 Page 3 of 11 • It's been disturbed already as part of Walmart's application. They meet the criteria for buffers. TENTATIVE VOTE Vice President Feeney asked, "Who would tentatively approve the Concept Plan?" Abstain: Lieuallen&Jelinek Yay: Yi, Muldoon, Feeney, Middaugh,& McDowell; Nay: Fitzgerald and Schmidt. VOTE TO TENTATIVELY APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN PASSES FIVE -TWO TWO ABSTENTIONS OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR DETAILED PLAN Vice President opened the public hearing for the Detailed Development Plan. DETAILED PLAN STAFF REPORT Gary Pagenstecher noted that prior to issuing the staff report, Staff discussed Detailed Plan issue areas with the applicant to better understand the circumstances and tradeoffs associated with the proposed design and to create an opportunity for the applicant to revise their plans to meet the standards and provide them for Commission review and consideration tonight. Gary went over the staff's findings from the staff report and noted that attention to the district standards is the focus of the staff report and a few other conditions as well, but the applicant feels that with the revised materials, that they have met most of those district standard conditions that were included in the staff report. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Brian Bennett, the developer on the site, on behalf of Compass Oncology to develop the comprehensive oncology cancer treatment center briefly stated that there were four various questions that the commission had at the end of the last session and addressed them He noted they decided to prioritize the natural resource—the wetland, the buffer, the enhancement of the buffer over the site topography. He said they met with the adjacent property owners offering several different opportunities to work together. Mimi.Doukas —ARS Engineering, representing Base Camp 1,LLC noted they had submitted additional material to the commissioners. They are treating the issues in a prioritized fashion with more priority on the wetlands. They'd sat down with adjacent property owners;it was a stalemate,but the conversation took place. Ms. Doukas believes they've come to a good November 14,2016 Page 4 of 11 solution. They've tried to address all the commission concerns and staff had good feedback in regards to the treatment along 72nd so they think the application has improved in that regard. Chuck Gregory, civil engineer with AKS Engineering—spoke about the sidewalk being pushed further away from the site. He also spoke about the retaining wall and how it actually opens up the view for the pedestrians as they come down 72nd. He noted other improvements such as adding many trees and that the pathway is concrete rather than asphalt. There are stone columns, benches—similar to the intersection of 72nd and Dartmouth. He spoke about safety, the required parking spaces,integration of a healing garden on the west side of the building, and improved streetscape. Scott Harris JRJ Architects went over the exhibits one by one that had been submitted in the supplemental material. Mimi Doukas added that they are comfortable with the conditions of approval with the exception of Condition 17—there's a little bit of wordsmithing requested by Dana Krawzcuk in the Perkins Koie memo. They want to make sure they are not exceeding rights that they don't have for adjacent property. The substance is there—just a little wordsmithing is needed. Dana Krawzcuk said the intent with clarifying Condition #17—the access easement that the subject site has over Walmart is specified just to our property—it's not a public access easement — so while we are willing to grant others access over our property, we want it to be abundantly clear that if they want to keep going over Walmart's property, to the street, they have to independently negotiate with Walmart for that access right because Walmart wasn't conditioned to require public access easement. That appears in some of the other conditions— for example Condition 15 it's talking about site work that the city would like to see us do on Walmart's property but it says "If permitted by Walmart." Condition #7 talks about the pedestrian easement and it'd like us to continue the public easement over Walmart's property "if permitted by Walmart"—and that"if permitted by WalmarC language was missing from Condition 17— so we want it to be abundantly clear that we are not obligated to give rights that we don't have. Brad Perrigo, Executive Director—Compass Oncology spoke to parking and wayfinding. He noted they are trying to keep patients close to the building with easy access and a single story parking lot is very important to their patients. As for wayfinding—they provide a packet to their patients very carefully explaining how to get to the building. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—None. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION—None APPLICANT FINAL COMMENTS Dana Krawzcuk reiterated that they would like a continuation. She noted that they want to make sure that they've hit all of the issues that are of concern to the commission and how they'd addressed them in the material already provided. She went over the various ways they'd November 14,201 G Page 5 of it addressed the known issues. She said they are very interested in anything the commissioners would like them to address in the upcoming written materials. The commissioners gave some suggestions as to what would be helpful for them to see when they come back while the applicant took notes. Some of the comments: • More discussion about is an oncology office actually going to happen—if not,would that matter for our consideration—legally speaking? From my point of view an oncologist office looks good but I'm not sure if it will be an oncology office. Please address that. • I would like more images —3D showing grading—the entire building I'd like more thoughts going into that wetland on the n/e corner. MOTION TO CONTINUE HEARING TO DECEMBER 5 Vice President Feeney moved - I move we continue the hearing, leave the public record open;written testimony is due within 7 days of today, that allows the applicant 7 days to respond to any additional information and then an additional 7 days for staff and planning commission to review that information for the December 5thhearing. President Fitzgerald seconded the motion. All in favor—none opposed. HEARING HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 5 PUBLIC HEARING TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN PROPOSAL: Over the past six months, staff and an urban renewal consultant team worked with a Citizen Advisory Council and Technical Advisory Committee to develop a Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan). On October 4,the City Center Development Agency initiated public review of the proposed Plan, and the Planning Commission is required to hold a public hearing as part of this review process. On November 14,the Planning Commission will be asked to publicly review the proposed Plan for conformance to local goals and objectives and make a recommendation to City Council on its adoption. President Fitzgerald opened the public hearing. STAFF REPORT The staff report is available on-line at The City website one week prior to the hearing. Susan Shanks,Associate Planner, introduced herself and Consultant Elaine Howard of Elaine Howard Consulting,LLC. Susan explained the type of hearing this is and that it is not a land use hearing. It's a hearing required by the ORS457 rules pertaining to Urban Renewal Plans. The statute requires that the city come to the Planning Commission for this public hearing. It's a slightly different kind of hearing. Elaine Howard explained that it's similar to a regular in that staff makes a presentation, the commission asks questions, and then it's open to the public and then rebuttal,if needed —then the commission deliberates and hopefully then makes a motion. November 14,2016 Page 6 of U Susan Shanks briefly spoke to the commissioners providing them with a general overview of what"urban renewal"is. Elaine Howard went through a PowerPoint and spoke about how urban renewal works,what it is exactly, the plan background, the schedule, and the plan content. She explained how this goes along with the city's goals and strategic plan. QUESTIONS What do we see from the school district on this with the diversion of the tax revenue monies?They were part of our technical advisory committee and they have not submitted any official comments, they asked us to clarify one of our public handouts about how urban renewal may indirectly affect them. They helped wordsmith that language but they have not expressed any concern. Property taxes are one funding source to that state school fund but there are other funding sources to the state school fund and I think that's why the school districts feel like they can support urban renewal—because they're funding out of the state school fund —not directly from those property taxes. So it's your experience that school districts always support urban renewal districts? I've been doing urban renewal for 11 years and I've never had a school district oppose it during that timeframe. What does the financing cost to the district? It depends on whatever the interest rate is when you are actually borrowing funds—so in the report there are assumptions for interest rates at 5%. What are TVF&R's concerns at this point?They are not opposed but don't want to wait 50 years to unfreeze the tax base. Why would someone not support an Urban Renewal district? People don't understand how it works. 'They think it's a new tax to them, and it's not. However,if you live in a city that has urban renewal,you'll see urban renewal on your tax bill and that helps perpetuate the thought that maybe it's an additional tax but what it shows them is the division of taxes and that you'd be paying that total amount regardless of whether or not there was urban renewal. Urban renewal is very complex and a lot of people just don't understand how it works. Additionally, people don't like the concept of taking money away from other taxing districts—because that's what urban renewal does? If it didn't exist that growth within that area—the taxes off that would go to all those taxing districts. Have there been studies done that Urban Renewal districts conclusively show a better rate of growth or a higher value return—let's say over a 35-year period? In every situation —or does it vary? It varies depending on the size of the cities. For instance, Coos Bay unfortunately is always in a state of recession so they have an urban renewal area—it's been going a long time—the citizens really support that but there just isn't a lot of growth in that city so it's hard for those property tag values to go us.The urban areas are more likely to get more growth in that area. Tigard is prime property—especially with the location of the freeways November l4,2016 Page 7 of 11 around it. So if you provide the infrastructure there,you're going to get more growth in that area than you would have without The payments on the debt would be from the incremental increases on the subject property?Yes. If Tigard borrows a bunch of money and ends up being wrong 10—15 years later; that's not our growth rate and we basically over borrowed. What's the fall-back on that in terms of how we're going to make up that difference and still fund what we've already spent?We cannot place a bond unless we actually have the money coming in that shows you can pay that debt service with a debt service ratio —so you as a city would not go out and place a bond until you already have the amount of money coming in on an annual basis with a savings account—a debt service coverage ratio—to be able to cover those payments. So you don't issue that$188 million up front—you do it as you get enough money to actually make those bond payments. So that protects the city. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—Jim Long—10730 SW 72nd Ave.,Tigard—turned in written testimony (Exhibit C). He made an argument to add from one to five contiguous commercially- zoned properties to the Tigard Triangle. He showed the commissioners a copy of a petition on which he had several signatures. The petition called for a walk-to residential park on the 1.54 acres behind the Tigard Fred Meyers. He said there were many comments from that petition that he'd included on pages three and four of his testimony. He said there are even more than that at this time. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION —None. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DELIBERATION President Fitzgerald noted that she knew Mr. Long had raised some issues and she would like Susan Shanks to revisit what was discussed at the CAC. Susan said Mr. Long had suggested this same idea of expanding the boundary to include those five properties that he spoke just recently about. There was a good discussion among the CAC members but Susan couldn't recall exactly what had been said. She said she did have notes from that meeting however that she would forward along to the commission. The notes describe the pros and the cons that were discussed but ultimately the count was 6 to 2 against expanding the area. So in honoring the CAC's input on that particular note,we did not expand the area to include those specific properties. MOTION Commissioner Muldoon moved: "I move that the Tigard Planning Commission finds that the proposed Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan conforms to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan based upon the information provided in and attached to the staff report and through public testimony, and further recommends that the Tigard City Council adopt the proposed Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan." Commissioner Hu seconded. A vote was taken. November 14,2016 Page 8 of 11 All in favor—none opposed. MOTION PASSES SECOND MOTION Commissioner Jelinek moved that the City Council consider expanding the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Boundary with property adjacent to and north of the proposed boundary that includes 1 —5 commercially-zoned lots on Spruce Street. The specific lots to be determined by staff upon consultation with Mr. Long. Commissioner McDowell seconded the motion and a vote was taken. Yay—Commissioners Lieuallen,Jelinek, Muldoon, Middaugh, and McDowell Nay—Commissioners Hu Fitzgerald, Feeney, and Schmidt Abstain—none. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 4 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT PROPOSAL: The City of Tigard proposes a Substantial Amendment to the existing City Center Urban Renewal Plan in Downtown Tigard. The purpose of the Planning Commission hearing is to review the proposed Substantial Amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan for its conformance with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, take public testimony,and make a recommendation to the Tigard City Council on adoption. STAFF REPORT The stf trport is available on-line at the City website one week prior to the hearing. Redevelopment Project Manager Sean Farrelly Sean went over his staff report noting that at the direction of the.City Center Development Agency Board, staff had worked with consultants to prepare a draft Substantial Amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan (Plan Amendment) to expand the boundary of the City Center Urban Renewal Area. On October 4, the CCDA initiated public review of the proposed Plan Amendment, and the Planning Commission is required to hold a public hearing as part of this review process. This evening the Planning Commission is asked to publicly review the proposed Plan Amendment for conformance to local goals and objectives and make a recommendation to City Council for its adoption. Sean went over a Power Point (Exhibit D) to help clarify. Elaine Howard explained that they have refreshed the Urban Renewal plan to conform to the existing Comprehensive Plan. There were also some Transportation System Plan goals that had been addressed and those were 12.2, 12.3, and 12.4. And there was a Tigard Park System Masterplan goal that was added in—and again,it was just refreshed to the current documents. Not adding new projects. She noted the adoption schedule is the same as the Tigard Triangle November 14,2016 Page 9 of 11 Plan where you have the planning commission hearing tonight— it goes to City Council December 13 and then out for a citywide vote again in May of 2017. Sean Farrelly reported on an action that the City Center Advisory Commission took last week— even though they don't have a formal say in this— they did recommend that the Planning Commission recommend this to council. QUESTIONS What if the voters don't approve? There would be some projects that won't get done. We'd have to prioritize, strategize and focus on projects that could be completed. But the existing area would remain intact with the existing maximum indebtedness— they just wouldn't reach as much of that as they could have if they added in those other properties. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR - None TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION—None. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING DELIBERATION—None. MOTION (RECOMMENDATION) Commissioner Muldoon: "I move that the Tigard Planning Commission finds, based upon the information provided in the staff report, public testimony, and the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Fourth Amendment, that the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Fourth Amendment conforms with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and further recommend that the Tigard City Council adopt the proposed Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Fourth Amendment." Commissioner Feeney seconded. There was a vote. All in favor—none opposed. MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL PASSES BRIEFING—Tom McGuire introduced the new City of Tigard Community Engagement Coordinator, Lauren Scott. She was hired in early September and he is excited to have her come to talk about what she is doing for the city—and to basically talk about her program. Lauren spoke briefly to the Commission about how she has never worked in a government position before. Over the past two and a half months she's been immersing herself in the culture—trying to learn the jargon. She thinks of herself as a bridge between the Community Development Department to the citizens of Tigard. If she can't understand what the planners are saying, she knows the citizens can't understand what they're saying. She believes community engagement comes in many forms—events, messaging, and then open communication and November 14,201 G Page 10 of 11 dialog. She believes it's important to get the community engaged early and often. She tries to make things more understandable —more concise. Her job is to help the city in communicating to the public. She believes communication needs to be dynamic— not simply notices that are a piece of paper that just says what's going on—people get it—they throw it out. She tries to make things more interesting. She had worked on the open house— adding elements that make it more interesting to the public. She's on several committees regarding community involvement. She has a 2017 plan in how people can get involved in different events in the city and also how we can expand our opportunities to reach diverse communities. OTHER BUSINESS —Tom McGuire went over the Planning Commission calendar. ADJOURNMENT President Fitzgerald adjourned the meeting at 10:17 p.m. Doreen L��"ing, ion Secretary V ATTEST: President F' d November 14,2016 Page 11 of 11 AIS-3008 3. B. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve the Change in Budget Committee Members Prepared For: Toby LaFrance, Finance and Information Services Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Resolution Agenda Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Move Mr. Patel to the alternate budget committee member and move Mr. Ludwig from the alternate position to a voting member of the budget committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve moving Mr. Patel to the alternate position and move Mr. Ludwig to a voting member of the budget committee. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council approved Rajendra Patel as a new budget committee voting member and approved William Ludwig as the budget committee alternate member, beginning January 1, 2017. Due to business commitments, Mr. Patel is unable to attend the budget committee meetings on April 19, 24th or May 1 st, when the budget committee will be approving the city's proposed FY 2017-18 budget. He has agreed to become the alternate budget committee member. Mr Ludwig has agreed to become the voting member, rather than the alternate member, and will be able to attend the budget committee meetings in April and May. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the change. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS NA DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION NA Attachments resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17- A RESOLUTION APPOINTING RAJENDRA PATEL AS AN ALTERNATE MEMBER AND WILLIAM LUDWIG AS A VOTING MEMBER OF THE FY 2017-2018 BUDGET COMM=E. WHEREAS,Mr.Patel was voted in as a member of the budget committee on December 13,2016 but is unable to attend the budget committee meetings to approve the 2017-18 budget; WHEREAS,Mr.Ludwig was voted in as the alternate member on December 13, 2016,but is able to attend the budget committee meetings for the approval of the 2017-18 budget: WHEREAS,Mr. Patel has agreed to move to the alternate position,replacing Mr. Ludwig, and Mr.Ludwig has agreed to become the voting member of the budget committee,replacing Mr.Patel;. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Rajendra Patel is appointed to a one-year term on the City of Tigard's Budget Committee beginning February 7,2017. SECTION 3: William Ludwig is appointed to a three-year term as a member on the City of Tigard's Budget Committee beginning February 7,2017. SECTION 4: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2017. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 17- Page 1 AIS-3014 3. C. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve City Council Meeting Minutes Submitted By: Kelly Burgoyne, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Approve City Council meeting minutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve minutes as submitted. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached council minutes are submitted for City Council approval: •December 20, 2016 •January 24, 2017 OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments December 20,2016 Minutes Placeholder for January 24,2017 Minutes City of Tigard Tigard Business/Workshop Meeting Minutes December 20, 20- 1-6- 1. 0161. BUSINESS MEETING - 6:30 PM A. At 6:31 p.m. Mayor Cook called the meeting to order. B. Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne called the roll. Name Present Absent Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard C. Mayor Cook asked the audience to stand for the pledge of allegiance. D. Council President Snider brought forward Resolution No. 16-48, establishing the Marland Henderson Community Grant. He said Councilor Henderson has taught him how to advocate for those who are less represented and how Councilor Henderson leads by example and puts hundreds if not thousands of hours into the many programs he is committed to and passionate about. He said council thought long and hard about what council should do to show their appreciation, and they came up with establishing the Marland Henderson Community Grant Fund. Council President Snider read the Resolution into the record. Mayor Cook called for a motion to adopt Resolution No. 16-48. Council President Snider motioned to approve Resolution No. 16-48 and Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD ESTABLISHING THE MARLAND HENDERSON COMMUNITY GRANT TO BE FUNDED THROUGH THE CITY'S MARIJUANA TAX FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPORTING SOCIAL SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY OF TIGARD Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 9 Name Yes No Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse (absent) Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook announced that Resolution No. 16-48 passed by a unanimous vote of council. Councilor Henderson thanked council and said he can't wait to serve. Councilor Woodard thanked Councilor Henderson and said how much he is valued. Mayor Cook said they learned a lot and talked about Councilor Henderson's many passions, and commended him for his ongoing passion. 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication—None. B. Citizen Communication—None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. CONSIDER AN IGA BETWEEN THE CITIES OF TIGARD AND BEAVERTON COVERING COOPERATIVE MAINTENANCE FOR SW BARROWS ROAD B. CONSIDER RESOLUTION WAIVING TEMPORARTY SIGN PERMIT FEES FOR SOUTHWEST METRO BABE RUTH BASEBALL A RESOLUTION WAIVING $252 IN TEMPORARY SIGN PERMIT FEES FOR SOUTHWEST METRO BABE RUTH BASEBALL Mayor Cook called for a motion to adopt the consent agenda. Councilor Woodard motioned to approve the consent agenda and Council President Snider seconded the motion. Name Yes No Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse (absent) Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.dgard-or.gov I Page 2 of 9 Mayor Cook announced that the consent agenda passed unanimously. 4. APPOINT CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBERS Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly gave the staff report and introduced the members that were in attendance. Mayor Cook called each member to the front and presented them each with a City of Tigard pin. Councilor Henderson motioned to approve the appointment of the City Center Advisory Commission members and Councilor Woodard seconded. Councilor Henderson said he is really excited about the new members. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING RICHARD SHAVEY AND APPOINTING JOSH KEARNEY,GLORIA PINZON MARIN,BATE ROGERS AND TIM MYSHAB AS VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AND REAPPOINTING SARAH VILLANUEVA AS A NON-VOTING EX OFFICIO MEMBER Name Yes No Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse (absent) Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook announced the City Center Advisory Commission appointments passed by a unanimous vote of council. 5. APPOINT TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS Senior Transportation Planner Brown gave the staff report and introduced the members that were in attendance. Mayor Cook called each member to the front and presented them with a City of Tigard pin. Councilor Woodard said he was part of the selection process and was impressed with the level of volunteers and said it wasn't easy to make selections. He is really excited with the new members. Councilor Woodard motioned to approve the appointment of the City Center Advisory Commission members and Councilor Henderson seconded. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.dgard-or.gov I Page 3 of 9 A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING ELISE SHEARER, KEVIN WATKINS AND JOSEPH VASICEK AND APPOINTING CANDI CORNILS, LONNIE MARTINEZ AND LINDSEY WISE AS VOTING MEMBERS OF THE TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND REAPPOINTING SUSAN PFAHL AND APPOINTING GEORGE BRANDT AS NON-VOTING ALTERNATE MEMBERS Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse (absent) Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook announced the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee appointments passed by a unanimous vote of council. 6. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD: CONSIDER CONTRACT AWARD FOR ATTORNEY SERVICES Management Analyst Wyatt and Senior Management Analyst Barrett gave the staff report. Mr. Barrett said this would be for a one-year contract with additional one-year options for approximately $240,000 a year. He said council had already seen and discussed the proposed contract at their meeting in December. Mr. Barrett said they received minimal changes to the contract from outside counsel and that staff would forward the red-lined version to council as soon as possible for review. Mayor Cook asked for this to return to the January 10 meeting once council had a chance to review the changes. Mr.Wyatt highlighted the contract length,that council maintains the ability to terminate the contract at any time with or without cause, the lead attorney would remain the same,council could veto the back-up attorney if needed and that council could perform an evaluation of the city attorney at any time. City Manager Wine asked if there were any outstanding issues that staff needed to research before bringing back. Councilor Henderson asked if there would be an opportunity for public comment if cost was changing. Mr.Wyatt said cost was not changing. Mayor Cook explained the cost escalators that were built into the contract. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.dgard-or.gov I Page 4 of 9 Mr. Barrett explained what they have been paying and that it is in line with what other jurisdictions pay. Mayor Cook asked staff to bring back the overall change in percentage when they return. Mr.Wyatt said council would need to extend the current contract since it was set to expire on December 31. Council agreed to extend the current contract ten days past December 31. WORKSHOP MEETING 7. RECEIVE UPDATE ON TIGARD'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM Temporary Project Planning Assistant Holloway gave the staff report. Ms. Holloway discussed what affordable housing means,market-rate housing,regulated affordable housing,who is served,median income and average cost of rent in Tigard, shortage of affordable housing rental units in Tigard, Tigard's role in meeting housing needs, twelve program strategies and how they have affected the affordable housing landscape in Tigard,updates to the development code,reduction in parking requirements,updates needed to ADU's, tax abatement,discontinuance of the affordable housing fee assistance program,Tigard's financial support for the Good Neighbor Program,pursuing grant opportunities for public improvements,improvements needed to the Housing Inspection Program, discontinuance of the Housing Emergency Fund,discontinuance of the Enhanced Safety Properties Program that was administered through the police department and the ongoing membership in housing advocacy groups. She said the majority of the programs are not currently successful and there is a lot of room for improvement. Ms. Holloway suggested the city could look at assisting affordable housing units through lowering or waiving SDC fees, offer renter protection and emergency rent assistance, extending the notice period from landlord to tenant for no-cause evictions,providing GAP Funding when federal funding isn't available,reducing parking restrictions and liberalizing ADU units. She discussed what other Oregon cities offer for affordable housing and said the city recently received a grant for equitable housing in the SW Corridor area and that CPHA is moving forward with adding affordable housing units in the Tigard Triangle area. Councilor Henderson asked what staff meant by"doubling up" and how staff accounted for that in future projections. Ms. Holloway said that"doubling up"is essentially lived in units with not enough beds and that it is hard to track because people don't always report it. Councilor Woodard asked what the city can do to keep affordable housing in place once changes to policy and code have been done and development is complete;how does the city keep that affordable housing capacity in the future? Ms. Holloway said that looking twenty years into the future and then revisiting affordable housing again would help. Councilor Woodard asked if reviewing it approximately every five years would be beneficial. Mayor Cook said it depends on whether units are regulated or unregulated and if they fit the criteria of affordable housing. Ms. Holloway said the more incentives the city offers,the more oversight the city has to ensure that they remain affordable. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov J Page 5 of 9 Councilor Woodard asked what staff thought was the biggest reason the city hasn't achieved affordable housing yet. Ms. Holloway said it was a combination of things and that the city doesn't have enough programs in place for affordable housing. Council President Snider commended staff on their work. He asked where staff put Tigard in comparison to other cities. Ms. Holloway said the nature of the program was powerful in 2002 and now there is a lot of room for improvement. Councilor Henderson said life was good in 2002-2008,the focus was different and things cost more now than they did back in 2002. Mayor Cook discussed tight budget situations and council reprioritizing during their goal setting. He talked about where and how to find funds for each program and the possibility of funding measures. He said Tigard also has the lowest property taxes in the County. Mayor Cook said it would be nice to see other cities that are more comparable to the size and budget of Tigard as a comparison, and that council would discuss this during their goal setting meeting. 8. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL UPDATE Safe Routes to School Program Coordinator Dragovich gave the staff report. Ms. Dragovich gave an overview of what the safe routes to school program is,where they've been, comparison of students who walk or bike to school on a typical day vs being driven,issues affecting parents' decision allowing children to walk/bike to and from school, overall percentage of children who walk/bike to school, on-the-ground projects,where they're going,parent recruitment,walking route maps,middle school engagement, finalizing action plans,grant funding for a bike fleet,implementation of the crossing guard program and the Metro RTO Grant award for FY 2017-19. Councilor Woodard commended staff for their work and said the program is exciting. Mayor Cook echoed Councilor Woodard's comments and commended staff for getting the grant award and said the program fits with the City's Strategic Plan. Councilor Henderson asked if staff has worked with kids who get directly on the bus and Ms. Dragovich replied they haven't. 9. DISCUSS NON-RESIDENTIAL TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SDC Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance and Economic Development Manager Purdy gave the staff report. Mr. LaFrance said it was an honor to present the last item to Councilor Henderson and said it has been an honor to serve him. Mr. LaFrance provided background on the project and gave council potential options and asked council for direction. He explained that in TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 6 of 9 April 2015, council adopted the current SDC report for residential and non-residential and that council delayed the residential fee for six months with no phasing in. Economic Development Manager Purdy discussed the information the commercial development community shared with staff on the proposed Transportation SDC fee increase and said they preferred there be no increase. The commercial development community said that the increase would price Tigard out of the market and the additional fee increase for schools would be a burden to tax payers,which would mean fewer classrooms being built. They stated that commercial development typically has a longer time line for completion than residential does and that the Washington County's TDT fee offers a credit for the first 5,000 square feet of a building. Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said that based on these concerns, staff's recommendations were ones that meet the needs of both the city and the development community. Mr. LaFrance discussed staff's recommendation of implementing a 90 percent discount,whether or not the fees are applied equally and gave examples of what that would mean. He said implementing the Transportation SDC fees for commercial development would start in twelve months and be phased in between twelve and thirty-six months and that this implementation meets the current needs of the city. He said the city currently offers the same redevelopment credit that Washington County's TDT offers. Councilor President Snider said the whole concept of SDC fees is to charge for the impact of development in order to provide the services the city has to provide. Mr. LaFrance provided potential solutions that meet the city's and the development community's needs and recommended that residential SDC fees be phased in as well and that council consider applying the fees and discounts equally. Council President Snider said he isn't very sympathetic to entities that want to build and do not want to pay into the infrastructure. Mayor Cook asked staff to explain the methodology of SDC fees and why the city wouldn't charge the full 100 percent of the fee. Mr. LaFrance said that SDC fees help pay for the additional impact to the city's system and infrastructure the development will have on the city, and that because the city has other funding sources, staff was recommending a discount so that development would still happen. He talked about the River Terrace development and their funding strategy. Councilor Woodard asked if offering a discount to development if that would negatively impact the city and if it did,who would pay for the additional shortfall. Mr. LaFrance said that SDC fees cannot be used to make-up for past decisions that have created impacts to the city's infrastructure, and that it can only be used for what the actual increase would be. He said that offering the 90 percent discount is a compromise that ensures there is funding coming into the city from development that will impact infrastructure,but allows a break for developers, ensuring that development still occurs in the city. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 7 of 9 Council President Snider asked why the city would burden the school district with any fee if they would be recommending a 90 percent discount to start with. Mr. LaFrance said that schools do impact traffic,it could create an equitable issue of selecting who to charge and who not to charge, and other developers may argue they too have a need for additional discounts. Council President Snider said he has trouble discounting fees more for commercial development than for residential. He asked if the rationale behind this was because they thought residential can bear more of the cost than commercial development. Mr. LaFrance said his recollection is that residential development can bear the overall cost more than commercial development and that residential has a larger impact on the transportation system because there is more residential land than there is commercial land,and explained how they calculate the methodology of SDC fees. Councilor Woodard asked if there will be another opportunity to discuss this. Staff replied there would be, and that tonight, staff was looking for direction from council on how to proceed in a way that is equitable. Mr. LaFrance said the Tigard Tualatin School District (ITSD) is concerned that paying this fee would reduce the number of future classrooms. Mayor Cook explained currently zero Transportation SDC fees for non-residential is being charged, so any amount the city charges is a benefit. Economic Development Manager Purdy suggested collecting fees twelve months after implementation and then phasing fees in as Mr.LaFrance discussed earlier. Councilor Woodard agreed that collecting 10 percent is more than the city is currently collecting, but would like staff to look further out to make sure that will be enough. Mayor Cook said they can always reevaluate the fee structure later and make changes then. Council President Snider would like to consider exempting schools altogether and asked staff to be prepared to consider this when they bring this back. Councilor Henderson said the fees being presented are half of what the County charges and that the city still needs to consider other options to pay for roads in the city;in the long run, the city still needs to figure out how to pay for city roads. Mr. LaFrance discussed the next steps,revenue that would be generated with the fee and how that is affected. He said staff would bring this back to a council workshop along with a draft ordinance. Mayor Cook asked staff to include the dollar amount that might be charged for schools and if schools should be included or exempt from the fees. 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: None. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 8 of 9 11. ADJOURNMENT At 8:55 p.m. Councilor Henderson motioned to adjourn the meeting and Council President Snider seconded the motion. Motion passed by unanimous vote. Name Yes No Mayor Cook Councilor Goodhouse (absent) Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Kelly Burgoyne,Deputy City Recorder Attest: John Cook,Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 20, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 9 of 9 FOR: JANUARY 24, 2017 MINUTES AIS-2889 4. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 40 Minutes Agenda Title: CCDA -Joint Meeting with CCAC Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Joint Meeting-Board or Other Juris. Meeting Type: City Center Development Agency Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Joint meeting with the City Center Advisory Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Review and discuss with the City Center Advisory Commission its 2016 Annual Report and draft 2017 Goals. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) makes recommendations to the Board of the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) on urban renewal policy, budget and implementation measures to improve Tigard's Downtown area. Two documents will inform the joint meeting discussion. The first is the CCAC's 2016 Annual Report, describing the key activities of the commission (required by CCAC by-laws); it was previously provided in the December 1, 2016 Council Newsletter. Among the projects that the CCAC advised on that had significant milestones in 2016 were the City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment, Main at Fanno redevelopment, and communications and community engagement. An attachment to the report is the CCAC Recommendations for CCDA Consideration. These are based on the research undertaken by commissioners as part of their "topics of interest" discussions that occurred throughout the year at CCAC meetings. The second document is the CCAC's draft goals for 2017. The CCAC developed these draft goals at their January 18th meeting. The CCAC will review these draft goals with the CCDA Board before finalizing them at their February meeting. The draft goals are attached. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones: Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Special Planning Areas- Downtown: Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 3: Engage the community through dynamic communication. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION September 6, 2016-Joint meeting with CCAC February 2 , 2016-Joint meeting with CCAC Attachments CCAC 2016 Annual Report 2017 Draft CCAC Goals 2016 Annual Report of the City Center Advisory Commission to the Board of the City Center Development Agency December 1, 2016 The City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) adopted annual goals and objectives for calendar year 2016. The annual agenda for the CCAC was largely devoted to developing and implementing the goals. This report is organized around the adopted 2016 CCAC Goals and Objectives. Goal 1. Support URA Project Infrastructure & Development Implementation a. Monitor, review, and provide input a. Key Projects on key projects i. Ash/Burnham Redevelopment ii. Public space (Tigard Street Trail, Fanno Creek Park Improvements) iii. Fanno&Main project tracking iv. New Metro CET grant (Main Street Lofts) — scope of work v. Parking management b. Monitor progress of prioritized Urban Renewal Plan Projects b. URP projects i. Fill-in gaps of Hall Blvd sidewalks ii. Plaza(s) development iii. The Tigard Street Trail&Tigard Street on- street bicycle lane iv. Public restroom(s) v. Ash Avenue rail crossing Outcomes: Staff provided the CCAC with regular updates on the progress of the Attwell off Main (Ash/Burnham) mixed use redevelopment project,which will add 165 downtown housing units. Grant funding was obtained to design and construct the Tigard Street Heritage Trail.A letter of support from the CCAC was included in the ODOT grant request. The CCAC provided input to staff and the CCDA into the future design process by selecting its preferred amenities in the plaza- a water feature and public restrooms.These features will be investigated during the design of the plaza. The Main @ Fanno project reached major milestones. In May, the CCDA was awarded$400,000 in EPA Brownfields grant funding to remediate the site in preparation for its redevelopment. The land use application, entitling the site was approved by the Tigard Hearings Officer in September,and CCAC members provided testimony in support. Having an entitled site footprint increases the marketability of the site. Progress was made in the new Metro CET grant-funded Main Street Lofts project to study the Tigard Transit Center and a neighboring property for redevelopment. The first phase,the Transit Center bus operations study was completed. The next phase of the project will create concept drawings which will be reviewed by the CCAC. The CCAC participated in the process to propose a Substantial Amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal plan to increase the size of the district by 37.7 acres which increases the capacity to reach the approved maximum indebtedness by$2.8 million. The CCAC recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council.The amendment if approved by voters in May 2017 will enable more urban renewal projects to be completed. Goal 2. Identify and Discuss Long-term impacts of future development projects to the downtown area Implementation a. Housing availability a. Factors may include supply,location, affordability b. Transportation& Circulation b1. SW Corridor Plan- (High Capacity Transit&corridor land use planning) b2. Main Street Green Street Phase II c. Improvement Programs C. Skyline Improvement Program (SIP) Outcomes: The CCAC submitted a letter of support for the city's application for Metro's Equitable Housing Grant program. The grant would address the potential displacement of low income housing residents due to rising rents projected if the SW Corridor project is built in Tigard.The grant awards will be announced later this year. The CCAC studied transportation and circulation as a topic of interest and made recommendation, including better signage for parking and promoting shared parking arrangements. In addition members of the CCAC participated in SW Corridor planning activities. The Urban Renewal Improvement Program was reactivated in 2016,including a Skyline Improvement Program. Two commissioners served on the committee that awarded $22,000 in matching grants to improve three downtown properties. Goal 3. Communications & Engagement Implementation a. Liaisons a. Liaisons i. Define the role of liaison and scope i. Attend meetings when downtown related agenda of representation items listed;appoint main liaison and a second. ii. Identify and assign CCAC members ii. Identify liaison for TTAC, SW Corridor Plan to liaise with other boards and Meetings,TDA, Budget,PRAB committees b. Engagement b. Engagement i. Support expansion and/or i. Advocate for potential funding options to keep formalization of partnership with TDA momentum going; Tigard Downtown Alliance ii. Develop communications plan for ii. For example,when talking about HCT,urban CCAC member engagement with renewal financing, downtown parking, etc. public for upcoming projects iii. Communication appropriate for all iii. Advocating for bilingual outreach as a policy Tigard communities c. Communication with c. Refine communication with Council/CCDA Board, 2 Council/CCDA Board update Council/CCDA Board on prior goal issues and outcomes, and request Council give more details when charging CCAC to examine issues Outcomes: The CCAC continued to maintain and improve its communications with other boards and commissions. One or more commissioners routinely attended meetings and/or monitored the agendas of the Tigard City Council, Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB),Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) and the TTAC Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee. The CCAC named both primary and backup liaisons to these committees. In addition,a commissioner was appointed to the Tigard Triangle Citizens Advisory Committee for the Triangle urban renewal plan. The chair of the CCAC regularly attended CCDA Board meetings,including executive sessions, and Council/CCDA's liaison regularly attends CCAC meetings. The CCAC prepared written communications to report on past and current recommendations for the two joint meetings with the Board of the CCDA in 2016. Elements for an active and vibrant urban Downtown such as enhanced pedestrian connections, street front improvements, and community accessibility were emphasized in CCAC recommendations for the Civic Center Facility Planning. The CCAC advocated for potential Tigard Downtown Alliance (TDA) funding options as part of the city budget process,including writing a letter to the Tigard Budget Committee. The CCAC met with the chair of the TDA to discuss ways to collaborate on downtown revitalization. The CCAC also engaged with downtown stakeholders by sponsoring a public comment meeting on allowing marijuana businesses to operate in Downtown. The CCAC advocated that staff create an online "story map" that communicates downtown successes as an efficient way to promote the urban renewal district; this webpage is currently being developed. Findings from 2016's topic of interest research may be utilized to develop future CCAC communications and can inform potential communication of incentive policies and economic development programs to the development community. The CCAC received training on "how to be an effective advocate" to assist with its public engagement on downtown issues and has requested continued involvement in ongoing projects such as Main Street Green Street Phase II and the Equitable Housing Grant. Goal 4. Actively self-educate on topics of interest to the downtown, such as marketing to developers and consumers, and affordable housing. Implementation a. Identify topics of interest b. Identify resources such as staff,information sources, existing programs, etc. related to topics of interest c. After reviewing materials, consider making recommendations regarding topics Outcomes: The CCAC spent substantial time at and outside of meetings to research topics of interest and to presentations findings with recommendations. Final recommendations to the CCDA are included as an attachment to this report. A preliminary recommendation to collect annual data on demographic and economic trends was affirmed by CCDA at the September joint meeting. Additional recommendations aimed at improving the commission's role as an advisory body have been made and may be implemented by future CCAC compositions. 3 The City Center Advisory Commission looks forward to further progress in the year to came. On behalf of the City Center Advisory Commission, r Carme Arende l.uhfi ao Chair X" e-Chair 4 City of Tigard City Center Advisory Commission Research RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CCDA CONSIDERATION The City Center Commission (CCAC), charged with advising on policy and projects related to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan and Area, adopted a goal in 2016 to develop internal expertise on topics of interest related to the City Center. More information about the research process used to develop recommendations is below and the recommendations are listed by category on the following page. Research on the topics of interest was intended to allow commission members to develop a shared understanding of city center issues, identify areas that warrant further investigation or research by the city or the commission, and lead to actionable policy recommendations to forward to the City Center Development Agency.As adopted February 10, 2016,the CCAC proposed to: "Actively self-educate on topics of interest to the downtown, such as marketing to developers and consumers, and affordable housing"and identified the following steps to implement this goal: a. Identify topics of interest b. Identify resources such as staff, information sources, existing programs, etc. related to topics of interest, c. After reviewing materials, consider making recommendations regarding topics. Over the course of a business meeting, commissioners brainstormed topics of interest and prioritized five issues to focus on.These five topics of interest identified were housing, marketing(to developers and consumers), and circulation and transportation (focused on the SW Corridor Plan, parking and the 2007 Connectivity Plan). Topical research results and subsequent CCAC discussions of the topics have been captured in the public record.' A large number of recommendations were identified in discussion by CCAC members during the research process. Draft policy and investment recommendations to date were shared with CCDA at the joint CCDA/CCAC meeting in September 2016.While Council took action on a number of short-term recommendations at that time, they also directed CCAC to refine or prioritize recommendations, identifying those related to existing policy and differentiating those requiring direction from Council. This document is not an exhaustive list of all the recommendations CCAC considered; more than twenty policy, program and project recommendations were identified by the CCAC during the year long research process.The final set of recommendations listed are intended to support existing policies and programs, leverage existing resources, increase communication and collaboration, and deliver responsive and efficient services. In order to group and prioritize recommendations the following categories, described on the next page,were used: • Walkability • Impactful • Responsiveness 'Transcripts of public meeting may be requested through a public records request while meeting minutes and agenda packets can be viewed online here:http://r)ublicrecords.tieard-or.£oy/Public/Browse.aspx?startid=660460 Page 1 of 2 City of Tigard City Center Advisory Commission Research Walkability:these recommendations are considered strategic priorities that will further the city's goal to become the most walkable community in the Pacific NW.The City can be a partner to businesses by promoting Downtown as a walkable place in support of the Strategic Plan, without adopting new policy. Desirable walkable areas provide interesting destinations including services, shopping and dining provided by downtown business, but also trails, parks and other public spaces. Promoting walking Downtown supports the strategic plan, reduces pressure on existing parking in south end, and encourages more window-shopping, and utilizes existing policies, programs and staff. • Schedule more Tigard Walks in the Downtown Area (themes could include: nature, art, recreation, etc) • Support recreational activities downtown through the recreational program: family friendly scavenger hunt downtown, family friendly fitness-themed activity passport(i.e. swing three times at this location,do ten pushups in front of that location), etc. • Communications and outreach such as walk and talks with city staff or elected officials, sharing elected favorite walks downtown on social media and/or on Tigard Maps!, developing a Corylus' photo hashtag promotion Walk and Dine or Walk and Shop campaigns(showcase people at Corylus, at library with books, at WES stop, with shopping bags, at Farmer's Market, etc). Bonus!-walking activities can help shift perceptions regarding appropriate parking distances Impactful:these recommendations are for short term achievable projects exemplified by Tigard's Lighter, Faster, Cheaper(LQC) program. LQC projects are "inexpensive and impactful actions that improve walkability, connectivity and health in Tigard".They are intended to ahieve progress without adding significant costs. • Add signage for off-street parking visible from the public street (distinguish between public parking and parking for customers) • Develop and deliver a proactive action plan for communicating core messages regarding Walkable Downtown. Plan should set concrete social and traditional media targets, provide staff/elected with talking points, coordinate with Legislative Advocacy and Redevelopment staff, etc • Consultant work related to implementation of urban renewal in the Triangle should also consider downtown Responsiveness:these recommendations are intended to address perceptions and clarify concerns that have previously been raised. Although the final two recommendations may be considered outside of the CCAC's direct charge, housing and economic development have considerable overlap with URA policies. • Provide easy access to information relating to development Downtown online and in print materials at events. Consolidate incentive information on a single webpage. • Use planned surveys of downtown businesses to assess interest and capacity in shared promotions and branding, adoption of uniform design elements, shared parking agreements, and establishing a Business Improvement District • Consider setting city-wide voluntary achievable Affordable Housing goals • Consider feasibility and value of an Economic Development advisory commission or board z Corylus is the scientific name for the local hazelnut and title of the twin gateway art pieces anchoring Main Street at Highway 99 which portray the hazelnut flower. Page 2 of 2 CCAC 2017 Goals Proposed for Adoption GOALS IMPLEMENTATION Support URA Infrastructure& Key Projects: Development Projects o Attwell @Burnham implementation • Monitor,review,and provide input on key o Fanno Creek Remeander projects o Fanno@Main&associated Brownfield work • Monitor and review Improvement o Parking management(public parking Programs facilities) o Public restrooms o Tigard Street Trail&plaza development o Urban Lofts/Nicoli (transit&housing) Monitor Mid/Long-term projects located o Equitable Housing Grant downtown and/or likely to have impacts o Civic Center Facilities Planning on downtown o Main St/Green St Phase I1 o Sidewalk Infill (area of interest: Hall Blvd) o SW Corridor Communications&Engagement Liaison Role&Scope • Liaisons o Attend meetings when downtown related agenda items listed o Identify liaisons for TTAC,SW Corridor Plan Meetings, PRAB. Appoint main liaison and a second • Tigard Downtown Alliance Invite TDA to provide regular briefings • Communication appropriate for all Tigard Advocate for a variety of outreach activities and communities formats to promote inclusive communications • Communication with Council/CCDA Board Chair/Vice Chair regularly attend Council/CCDA Board meetings [when downtown related agenda items listed] and majority of Commissioners will attend/participate in Joint Meetings with CCDA Walking&Parking Focus Learn more about these topics to develop policy and project recommendations that will support the city's Strategic Plan&the City Center Urban Renewal Plan Prepared by CCAC Chair Arendes for February 7, 2017 CCAC Joint Meeting with CCDA AIS-3007 5. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Appoint Planning Commission Member Prepared For: Tom McGuire, Community Development Submitted By: Doreen Laughlin, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall Council appoint Nathan C.Jackson as a voting member of the Tigard Planning Commission? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve a resolution appointing alternate Commissioner Nathan C.Jackson to an unexpired term as a voting member of the Planning Commission. The term will expire on December 31, 2018. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Due to the resignation of Commissioner Gary Jelinek, as of January 10, 2017, there is an opening on the Planning Commission. The open position is for a voting member in the middle of a term that is due to expire December 31, 2018. In November 2016,Tigard resident Nathan C.Jackson applied for the Planning Commission and was appointed as an alternate member. Commissioner Jackson was contacted by staff about this opening, and indicated a desire to serve as a full voting member. The Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee member, Mayor Cook, was contacted by staff regarding the situation. Mayor Cook was reminded of Commissioner Jackson's application and qualifications, and was informed about his willingness to serve as a full voting member. Mayor Cook is in agreement that alternate Commissioner Nathan C.Jackson should be appointed to serve out the rest of this unexpired term. Attachment 1: Resolution implementing recommended appointment. Attachment 2: Biographical information on recommended appointee. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to direct staff to advertise for another person to fill this position. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Goal #5 "Expand Opportunities to Engage People in the Community" DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Resolution Bio -Nathan Jackson CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17- A RESOLUTION APPOINTING NATHAN C. JACKSON AS A VOTING MEMBER OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TO FILL FORMER COMMISSIONER JELINEK'S UNEXPIRED TERM WHEREAS,there is one vacancy for a voting member on the Planning Commission;and WHEREAS, the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee member, Mayor John Cook, recommends that Council appoint alternate Commissioner Nathan C.Jackson as a voting member to fill the unexpired term that will end December 31,2018. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Nathan C. Jackson is appointed to the Planning Commission as a voting member to fill an unexpired term ending December 31,2018. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2017. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: Deputy City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 17- Page 1 Attachment 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPOINTEE'S BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION On February 7, 2017,Tigard City Council will consider a Resolution to appoint Nathan C. Jackson as a voting member of the Tigard Planning Commission. Nathan C.Jackson has lived in Tigard for seven years. He holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Philosophy, Economics, and Classical Studies from Willamette University. Nathan has worked as a software quality assurance analyst at Greater Giving—formerly Auctionpay— for eight years. In addition to playing music with local groups and participating in occasional volunteer projects,Nathan looks forward to expanding his service to the community as a member of the Planning Commission. AIS-2880 6. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Refer Ballot Measure to Voters for Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Prepared For: Susan Shanks Submitted By: Susan Shanks, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall City Council approve a Resolution referring implementation of the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan, including the use of tax increment financing, to the electors of the City of Tigard in May 2017? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that City Council approve the attached Resolution, including the ballot title, referring the question of whether to implement the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan to voters. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council unanimously approved Ordinance No. 16-24 implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan, including the use of tax increment financing, at a public hearing on December 13, 2016. City Council directed staff to prepare a ballot tide at that time and subsequently reviewed the ballot tide on January 24, 2017. The attached Resolution includes Ordinance 16-24 (Exhibit 1) and the reviewed ballot title (Exhibit 2) for Council's final review and approval. Per the City Charter, Ordinance 16-24 will not go into effect unless approved by Tigard voters at a general election. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The city needs to prepare a ballot title for implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and refer it to Tigard voters in order to meet its Metro funding obligation and City Charter requirements. However, Council may choose to postpone the ballot measure process and refer the plan to voters at a later date. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan Goal 1 - Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity. City Strategic Plan Goal 2 - Ensure development advances the vision. City Council Goal 3 - Adopt and begin Implementation of Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan (TTSP). DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 2015 • Staff completed the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan ('I"TSP) - March • Council directed staff to submit a CPDG application to Metro for funds to implement the TTSP -June 2016 • Council directed staff to enter into an IGA with Metro for CPDG funds - February • Council awarded a contract to MIG Inc. to implement the TTSP - March • Council approved the formation/membership of a Citizen Advisory Council (CAC) for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) - April • Council appointed an additional CAC member - August • Staff briefed Council and Planning Commission on the Plan - September • CCDA initiated public review of the Plan — October • Council approved the Plan — December 2017 • Council reviewed the ballot title referring the implementation of the Plan to voters -January Fiscal Impact Cost: $47,469,708 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department/program):N/A Additional Fiscal Notes: The estimated impact to the city's general fund in foregone revenue is $47,469,708 between the years 2019 and 2053. Attachments Voter Referral Resolution Ballot Title-Draft CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17- A RESOLUTION APPROVING REFERRAL TO THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AT THE MAY 16,2017 SPECIAL ELECTION,THE QUESTION OF WHETHER TO IMPLEMENT AN URBAN RENEWAL PLAN,INCLUDING THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING,FOR THE TIGARD TRIANGLE WHEREAS,Section 47 of the City of Tigard's Charter requires voter approval for any urban renewal plan or amendment that initiates the use of tax increment financing;and WHEREAS,the City Council of Tigard adopted Ordinance No. 16-24,which implements an urban renewal plan,including the use of tax increment financing, for the Tigard Triangle;and WHEREAS,the City Council of Tigard,pursuant to the City's Charter,desires to refer Ordinance No. 16-24 to the electors of the City of Tigard. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Measure. A measure election is called in and for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon, for the purpose of submitting to the electors of the City of Tigard,a measure that, if approved,would enact an ordinance implementing an urban renewal plan,including the use of tax increment financing, for the Tigard Triangle. A copy of the measure is attached and incorporated as Exhibit 1.The original exhibits that were attached to the measure are not attached. Copies of the original exhibits may be obtained through the City Recorder. SECTION 2: Election Conducted by Mail. The measure election shall be held on Tuesday,May 16 2017. The precinct for the election shall be all of the territory within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard. As required by ORS 254.465 and ORS 254.470,the measure election will be conducted by mail by the Washington County Elections Department,according to the procedures adopted by the Oregon Secretary of State. SECTION 3: Notice of Ballot Title.The City Elections Officer is directed to publish notice of receipt of the ballot title in the Tigard Times or The Oregonian in compliance with ORS 250.275(5). SECTION 4: Ballot Title. Pursuant to ORS 250.285 and ORS 254.095,the Tigard City Council directs the City Elections Officer to file a Notice of City Measure Election in substantially the form of Exhibit 2,with the Washington County Elections Office,unless,pursuant to a valid ballot title challenge,the Tigard City Council certifies a different Notice of City Measure Election be filed,such filing shall occur no earlier than the eighth business day after the date on which Exhibit 2 is filed with the City Elections Officer and not later than March 16,2017'. SECTION 5: Explanatory Statement. Pursuant to ORS 251.345,the Tigard City Council directs the City Manager to prepare a Measure Explanatory Statement for publication in the county voters' pamphlet;said statement shall be filed with the Washington County Elections Office at the same time the Notice of City Measure Election is filed by the City Elections Officer. Page 1 of 2 SECTION 6: Delegation. The Tigard City Council authorizes the City Manager or a designee of the City Manager to act on behalf of the City of Tigard and to take such further action as is necessary to carry out the intent and purposes herein in compliance with the applicable provisions of law. SECTION 7: Effect of"Yes"Vote. If a majority of eligible voters vote"yes"on the measure, Ordinance No. 16-24 will become operative,and the City will implement an urban renewal plan, including the use of tax increment financing,for the Tigard Triangle. SECTION 8: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of ,2017. Mayor—City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder—City of Tigard Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16-.? AN ORDINANCE MAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED WHEREAS, the Tigard City Center Development Agency (the "Agency', as the duly authorized and acting urban renewal agency of the City of Tigard, Oregon, is proposing to undertake certain urban renewal activities in a designated area within the City pursuant to ORS Chapter 457;and WHEREAS, the Agency,pursuant to the requirements of ORS Chapter 457,has caused the preparation of the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Plano. The Plan authorizes certain urban renewal activities within the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area (the"Area';and WHEREAS, the Agency has caused the preparation of a certain Urban Renewal Report dated December 13, 2016, attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "R.eporeto accompany the Plan as required under ORS 457.085(3); and WHEREAS, the Agency forwarded the Plan and Report to the City's Planning Commission (the "Commission's for review and recommendation. The Commission considered the Plan and Report on November 14, 2016 and made a recommendation that the Plan conformed with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,attached hereto as Exhibit C (the"Planning Commission Recommendation'D;and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2016, representatives of the City met with the Washington Counts Board of Commissioners to review the Plan,including proposed maximum indebtedness for the Plan;and WHEREAS,the Plan and the Report were forwarded on October 5,2016 to the governing body of each taxing district affected by the Plan,and the Agency has therefore consulted and conferred with each taxing district;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council (the "City Council' received a written recommendation from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue accepting a city-proposed change to the Plan to limit Plan duration as provided for in Section VIII (D) of the Plan and to require taxing district concurrence for certain kinds of Plan amendments as provided for in Section IX(B) of the Plan;and WHEREAS, on November 29,2016 the City caused notice of the hearing to be held before the Council on the Plan,including the required statements of ORS 457.120(3),to be mailed to all electors in the City;and WHEREAS, on December 13,2016 the City Council held a public hearing to review and consider the Plan, the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation, and the public testimony received on or before that date and to receive additional public testimony;and WHEREAS, after consideration of the record presented through this date, the City Council does by this Ordinance desire to approve the Plan. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE No. 16-a1-j Page 1 I SECTION 1: The Plan complies with all requirements of ORS Chapter 457 and the specific criteria of 457.095(1) through (7), in that, based on the information provided in the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation,and the public testimony before the City Council:- 1. ouncil:1. The process for the adoption of the Plan, has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 457 of the Oregon Revised Statutes; 2. The area designated in the Plan as the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area is blighted, as defined by ORS 457.010(1) and is eligible for inclusion within the Plan because of conditions described in the Report in the Section "Existing Physical, Social, and Economic Conditions and Impacts on Municipal Services," including the existence of inadequate streets and other rights-of-was, open spaces, and utilities and underdevelopment of property within the Area(ORS 457.010(1)(e) and(g)); 3. The rehabilitation and redevelopment described in the Plan to be undertaken by the Agency is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare of the City because absent the completion of urban renewal projects, the Area will fail to contribute its fair share of property tax revenues to support City services and will fail to develop and/or redevelop according to the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 4. The Plan conforms to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and documented ancillary documents and provides an outline for accomplishing the projects described in the Plan, as more fully described in the Plan and in the Planning Commission Recommendation; 5. No residential displacement will occur as a result of the acquisition and disposition of land and redevelopment activities proposed in the Plan and therefore the Plan does not include provisions to house displaced persons; 6. The acquisition of real property provided in the Plan is necessary for the development of transportation-related infrastructure improvements in the Area and for the development of public spaces because the Agency does not own all the real property interests (e.g., rights-of-way, easements, fee ownership, etc.) that will be requited to undertake and complete these projects as described in Chapter IV of the Plan and Section V of the Report; 7. Adoption and carrying out the Plan is economically sound and feasible in that eligible projects and activities will be funded by urban renewal tax revenues derived from a division of taxes pursuant to section 1c, Article IX of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 457.440 and other available funding as more fully described in the Section "Financial.Analysis of the Plan" of the Report; 8. The City shall assume and complete any activities prescribed it by the Plan;and 9. The Agency consulted and conferred with affected overlapping taxing districts prior to the Plan being forwarded to the City Council. SECTION 2: The Tigard Urban Renewal Plan is hereby approved based upon review and consideration by the Tigard City Council of the Plan and Report, the Tigard Planning Commission Recommendation,each of which is hereby accepted,and the public testimony in the record. ORDINANCE No. 16- 2 y Page 2 SECTION 3: The City Manager shall forward forthwith to the Agency a copy of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: The Agency shall thereafter cause a copy of the Plan to be recorded in the Records of Washington County,Oregon. SECTION 5: The City Manager,in accordance with ORS 457.115,shall publish notice of the adoption of the Ordinance approving the Plan,including the provisions of ORS 457.135,in the Tigard Times no later than four days following adoption of this Ordinance. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be effective upon certification by the County Elections Official that it has received voter approval at an election conducted on May 16,2017. PASSED: By LLh aj uj)1 dj&t tote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this 13M_day of /Deet-M bei- ,2016. K Burgoyo,Deputy Ck RecbWer APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of eC+2.M beX"� 2016. �X-Dax . John . Cook,Mayor Approved 4 to form: City Attorn I Date ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 3 Placeholder: Final Ballot Title language may be updated at January 31, 2017 Council meeting Draft Ballot Title for Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan CAPTION (10 words max) Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Implementation QUESTION (20 words max) Shall the City implement an urban renewal plan, including the use of tax increment financing, for the Tigard Triangle? SUMMARY(175 words max) This measure approves the ordinance implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) and the use of tax increment financing to fund projects undertaken as part of the Plan. No new taxes would be imposed. Funding comes from capturing increased property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area that would otherwise go to the City general fund and other taxing entities. The Plan's proposed boundaries, goals, projects, and provisions for amendments are described in the Plan.The Plan currently includes many projects, such as: • Red Rock Creek restoration, focusing on water quality and public access • Street and sidewalk construction, focusing on connectivity and safety • Major sewer repairs to address public health • Intersection improvements,focusing on traffic congestion and multimodal access • New trails and parks Unless otherwise amended as allowed by the Plan,the total amount of tax increment that can be spent on projects over the life of the Plan is$188 million.This is anticipated to take 35 years. A copy of the Plan is available at: http://www.tigard-or.gov/Proiects/TigardTrianple/tt UR Plan.pdf SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR4-1/1W tl• rMMA416 CAPTION (10 words) (DATE OF MEETING) Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Implementation—requires no new taxes QUESTION (20 words) Shall the City implement the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan? SUMMARY(175 words) This measure approves the ordinance implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) and the use of tax increment financing to fund projects undertaken as part of the Plan. Funding comes from capturing property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area. The Tigard Triangle is the area generally between 99W, 217, and 15. The Plan's proposed boundaries, goals, projects, and provisions for amendments are described in the Plan.The Plan currently includes many types of projects, such as: • Red Rock Creek restoration,focusing on water quality and public access • New streets and sidewalks,focusing on safe walking and cycling • Major sewer repairs to address public health • Intersection improvements, focusing on traffic congestion • New trails and parks Unless otherwise amended as allowed by the Plan, the total amount of tax increment that can be spent on projects over the life of the Plan is$188 million. This is anticipated to take 35 years. More information is available at www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal. A copy of the Plan is available at www.tigard-or.gov/TrianglePlan. Notice of Measure Election SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET,01,16ORS SEL3802 City IF F0- 5,250.285,254.095,254.465 Notice (DATE OF MEETING) Date of Notice Name of City or Cities Date of Election City of Tigard Final Ballot Title The following is the final ballot title of the measure to be submitted to the city's voters.The ballot title notice has been published and the ballot title challenge process has been completed. Caption 10 words which reasonably identifies the subject of the measure. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Implementation—requires no new taxes. Question 20 words which plainly phrases the chief purpose of the measure. Shall the City implement the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan? Summary 175 words which concisely and impartially summarizes the measure and its major effect. This measure approves the ordinance implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan(Plan)and the use of tax increment financing to fund projects undertaken as part of the Plan. Funding comes from capturing property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area. The Tigard Triangle is the area generally between 99W,217,and 15. The Plan's proposed boundaries,goals,projects,and provisions for amendments are described in the Plan.The Plan currently includes many types of projects,such as: •Red Rock Creek restoration,focusing on water quality and public access •New streets and sidewalks,focusing on safe walking and cycling •Major sewer repairs to address public health •Intersection improvements,focusing on traffic congestion •New trails and parks Unless otherwise amended as allowed by the Plan,the total amount of tax increment that can be spent on projects over the life of the Plan is$188 million. This is anticipated to take 35 years. More information is available at www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal. A copy of the Plan is available at www.tigard-or.gov/TrianglePlan. Explanatory Statement 500 words that impartially explains the measure and its effect. If the county is producing a voters' pamphlet an explanatory statement must be drafted and attached to this form for: 4 any measure referred by the city governing body;or Explanatory Statement Attached? ❑Yes ❑ No ->any initiative or referendum, if required by local ordinance. Authorized City Official Not required to be notarized. Name Title Mailing Address Contact Phone By signing this document: *I hereby state that I am authorized by the city to submit this Notice of Measure Election;and *1 certify that notice of receipt of ballot title has been published and the ballot title challenge process for this measure completed. Signature Date Signed AIS-2885 7. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Refer the Substantial Amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan to the Voters Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall City Council approve the attached Resolution referring the implementation of the Substantial Amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan, to the electors of the City of Tigard in May 2017? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that City Council approve the attached Resolution, including the ballot title, referring the question of whether to implement the Substantial Amendment to City Center Urban Renewal Plan to the voters. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council unanimously approved Ordinance No. 16-25 implementing the Substantial Amendment to City Center Urban Renewal Plan at a public hearing on December 13, 2016. City Council directed staff to prepare a ballot title at that time and subsequently reviewed the ballot title on January 24, 2017. The attached Resolution includes Ordinance 16-25 (Exhibit 1) and the reviewed ballot title (Exhibit 2) for Council's final review and approval. Per the City Charter, Ordinance 16-25 will not go into effect unless approved by Tigard voters at a general election. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to postpone the ballot measure process and refer the plan amendment to voters in a future election. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Tigard Comprehensive Plan Special Planning Areas- Downtown. Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. CW: Strategic Plan City Strategic Plan Goal 1: Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity. City Strategic Plan Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION January 24, 2017: Reviewed the ballot title referring the implementation of the Substantial Amendment to voters. December 13, 2016: City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment Public Hearing. October 4, 2016: Public Review of City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment. September 20, 2016: Discuss Adoption Process for Substantial Amendment to Downtown City Center Urban Renewal Plan. May 3, 2016 : Discuss Potential Substantial Amendment to City Center Urban Renewal Plan. Fiscal Impact Cost: $557,528 Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): General Fund Additional Fiscal Notes: The estimated impact to the City of Tigard's general fund is $557,528 between the years 2019 and 2034. However this impact was anticipated by the adoption of the original City Center Urban Renewal Plan in 2006. Attachments CC Voter Referral Resolution Ballot Title- Draft CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.17- A RESOLUTION APPROVING REFERRAL TO THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AT THE MAY 16,2017 SPECIAL ELECTION,THE QUESTION OF WHETHER TO AMEND THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN BY EXPANDING THE SIZE OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA WHEREAS,Section 47 of the City of Tigard's Charter requires voter approval for any urban renewal plan or amendment that initiates the use of tax increment financing;and WHEREAS,the City Council of Tigard adopted Ordinance No. 16-25,which amends the City Center(Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan Amendment,which increases the size of the urban renewal area by adding seven properties;and WHEREAS,the City Council of Tigard,pursuant to the City's Charter,desires to refer Ordinance No. 16-25 to the electors of the City of Tigard. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Measure. A measure election is called in and for the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon,for the purpose of submitting to the electors of the City of Tigard, a measure that,if approved,would amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area. A copy of the measure is attached and incorporated as "Exhibit 1." The original exhibits that were attached to the measure are not attached. Copies of the original exhibits may be obtained through the City Recorder. SECTION 2: Election Conducted by Mail. The measure election shall be held on Tuesday,May 16 2017. The precinct for the election shall be all of the territory within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard. As required by ORS 254.465 and ORS 254.470,the measure election will be conducted by mail by the Washington County Elections Department,according to the procedures adopted by the Oregon Secretary of State. SECTION 3: Notice of Ballot Title.The City Elections Officer is directed to publish notice of receipt of the ballot title in the Tigard Times or The Oregonian in compliance with ORS 250.275(5). SECTION 4: Ballot Title. Pursuant to ORS 250.285 and ORS 254.095,the Tigard City Council directs the City Elections Officer to file a Notice of City Measure Election in substantially the form of Exhibit 2,with the Washington County Elections Office, unless,pursuant to a valid ballot title challenge,the Tigard City Council certifies a different Notice of City Measure Election be filed,such filing shall occur no earlier than the eighth business day after the date on which Exhibit 2 is filed with the City Elections Officer and not later than March 16,2017. SECTION 5: Explanatory Statement. Pursuant to ORS 251.345, the Tigard City Council directs the City Manager to prepare a Measure Explanatory Statement for publication in the county voters' pamphlet; said statement shall be filed with the Washington County Elections Office at the same time the Notice of City Measure Election is filed by the City Elections Officer. Page 1 of 2 SECTION 6: Delegation. The Tigard City Council authorizes the City Manager or a designee of the City Manager to act on behalf of the City of Tigard and to take such further action as is necessary to carry out the intent and purposes herein in compliance with the applicable provisions of law. SECTION 7: Effect of"Yes"Vote. If a majority of eligible voters vote"yes"on the measure, Ordinance No. 16-25 will become operative,and the City will amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area. SECTION 8: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of ,2017. Mayor—City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder—City of Tigard Page 2 of 2 Exhibit 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16-aS AN ORDINANCE 11IAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED WHEREAS, the Tigard City Center Development Agency (the "Agency', as the duly authorized and acting urban renewal agency of the City of Tigard, Oregon,is proposing to undertake certain urban renewal activities in a designated area within the City pursuant to ORS Chapter 457;and WHEREAS, the Agency,pursuant to the requirements of ORS Chapter 457,has caused the preparation of the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Plan Amendment'. The Plan Amendment authorizes certain urban renewal activities within the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area (the"Area");and WHEREAS, the Agency has caused the preparation of a certain Urban Renewal Report dated December 13, 2016, attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Report's to accompany the Plan Amendment as required under ORS 457.085(3); and WHEREAS, the Agency forwarded the Plan Amendment and Report to the City's Planning Commission (the "Commission's for review and recommendation. The Commission considered the Plan Amendment and Report on November 14, 2016 and made a recommendation that the Plan Amendment conformed with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,attached hereto as Exhibit C (the "Planning Commission Minutes';and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2016, representatives of the City met with the Washington County Board of Commissioners to review the Plan Amendment, including proposed maximum indebtedness for the Plan Amendment;and WHEREAS, the Plan Amendment and the Report were forwarded on October 5,2016 to the governing body of each taxing district affected by the Plan Amendment, and the Agency has therefore consulted and conferred with each taxing district;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council (the"City CouncT') has not received written recommendations from the governing bodies of the affected taxing districts;and WHEREAS, on November 29,2016 the City caused notice of the hearing to be held before the Council on the Plan Amendment,including the required statements of ORS 457.120(3), to be mailed to registered voters within Tigard's incorporated limits;and WHEREAS, on December 13, 2016 the City Council held a public hearing to review and consider the Plan Amendment, the Report, the recommendation of the Tigard Planning Commission, and the public testimony received on or before that date and to receive additional public testimony; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the record presented through this date, the City Council does by this Ordinance desire to approve the Plan Amendment NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 1 SECTION 1: The Plan Amendment complies with all requirements of ORS Chapter 457 and the specific criteria of 457.095(1) through (7),in that,based on the information provided in the Report, the Planning Commission Recommendation, and the public testimony before the City Council:- 1. ouncil:1. The process for the adoption of the Plan Amendment, has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 457 of the Oregon Revised Statutes; 2. The area designated in the Plan Amendment as the Tigard City Center Urban Renewal Area is blighted, as defined by ORS 457.010(1) and is eligible for inclusion within the Plan Amendment because of conditions described in the Report in the Section "Existing Physical, Social, and Economic Conditions and Impacts on Municipal Services",including the existence of inadequate streets,trails, sidewalks,parks,and utilities,and a prevalence of depreciated values resulting from underdevelopment and underutilization of property within the Area (ORS 457.010(1)(e)and(g); 3. The rehabilitation and redevelopment described in the Plan Amendment to be undertaken by the Agency is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare of the City because absent the completion of urban renewal projects, the Area will fail to contribute its fair share of property tax revenues to support City services and will fail to develop and/or redevelop according the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 4. The Plan Amendment conforms to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and documented ancillary documents and provides an outline for accomplishing the projects described in the Plan Amendment, as more fully described in the Plan ,amendment and in the Planning Commission recommendation; 5. No residential displacement will occur as a result of the acquisition and disposition of land and redevelopment activities proposed in the Plan Amendment and therefore the Plan Amendment does not include provisions to house displaced persons; 6. The acquisition of real property provided in the Plan,including real property in the area that is the subject of this Plan Amendment, is necessary for the development of transportation-related infrastructure improvements in the Area and for the development of public spaces because the Agency does not own all the real property interests (e.g., rights- of-way, easements, fee ownership, etc.) that will be required to undertake and complete these projects as described in Chapter IV of the Plan Amendment and Section V of the Report;and 7. Adoption and carrying out the Plan amendment is economically sound and feasible in that eligible projects and activities u ill be funded by urban renewal tax revenues derived from a division of taxes pursuant to section lc,Article IX of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 457.440 and other available funding as more fully described in the Sections V,VI,VII, and VIII of the Report; 8. The City shall assume and complete any activities prescribed it by the Plan Amendment; and 9. The Agency consulted and conferred with affected overlapping taxing districts prior to the Plan Amendment being forwarded to the City Council. ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 2 SECTION 2: The Tigard Urban Renewal Plan Amendment is hereby approved based upon review and consideration by the Tigard City Council of the Plan Amendment and Report,the Tigard Planning Commission recommendations,each of which is hereby accepted,and the public testimony in the record. SECTION 3: The City Manager shall forward forthwith to the_agency a copy of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: The _agency shall thereafter cause a copy of the Plan --amendment to be recorded in the Records of Washington County,Oregon. SECTION 5: The City Manager,in accordance with ORS 457.115,shall publish notice of the adoption of the Ordinance approving the Plan Amendment including the provisions of ORS 457.135,in the Tigard Times no later than four days following adoption of this Ordinance. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be effective upon certification by the County Elections Official that it has received voter approval at an election conducted on 2017. PASSED: By LLWt(1\6 NON vote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this 13 day of 1)-e-cy mbe lr ,2016. Kelly Burgo Deputy R order APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 3 day of D&-Um In eA"" ,2016. John ook,Mayor Approved as to form: City lkttomey lal Date ORDINANCE No. 16- Page 3 Placeholder: Final Ballot Title language may be updated at January 31, 2017 Council meeting Draft Ballot Title for City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment CAPTION (10 words max) City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment QUESTION (20 words max) - Shall the City amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area? SUMMARY (175 words max) This measure approves the ordinance authorizing the City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan Amendment, which increases the size of the urban renewal area by adding seven properties, or 37.70 acres. The original City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) was approved by voters in 2006 and includes projects such as street and streetscape improvements, bike and pedestrian improvements, park improvements, and support for public spaces and buildings. However, as a result of the economic downturn,tax increment revenues are less than originally projected. The Plan Amendment provides additional capacity to complete those projects. The Plan Amendment would not increase the approved $22 million cap for the Plan and would not impose new taxes. Funding comes from capturing increased property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area that otherwise would go to the City general fund and other taxing entities. Copies of the Plan and Plan Amendment are available at: http://www.tigard- or.gov/city hall/urban renewal.php Draft Ballot Title for City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment CAPTION (10 words max) SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 2l? ik-m 44,7 City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment—requires no new taxes (DATE OF MATING) QUESTION (20 words max) - Shall the City amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area? SUMMARY (175 words max) This measure approves the ordinance authorizing the City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan Amendment, which increases the size of the urban renewal area by adding seven properties, or 37.70 acres. The Plan Amendment would not increase the approved $22 million cap for the Plan and would not impose new taxes. The original City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) was approved by voters in 2006 and includes projects such as: • Street and streetscape improvements, • Bike and pedestrian improvements, • Park improvements, and • Support for public spaces and buildings As a result of the economic downturn, urban renewal district revenues are less than originally projected. The Plan Amendment provides additional capacity to complete those projects. Funding comes from capturing property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area. More information is available at www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal. A copy of the Plan and Plan Amendment are available at www.tigard-or.gov/DowntownPlan. Notice of Measure Election SUPPLEMENTAL PACKEI EL 802 City FOR 3 RS 250.035,250.041, !Tl ATR ll�i A/��-'i T�TTI 250.285,254.095,254.465 Notice Date of Notice Name of City or Cities Date of Election City of Tigard Final Ballot Title The following is the final ballot title of the measure to be submitted to the city's voters.The ballot title notice has been published and the ballot title challenge process has been completed. Caption 10 words which reasonably identifies the subject of the measure. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment—requires no new taxes. Question 20 words which plainly phrases the chief purpose of the measure. Shall the City amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area? Summary 175 words which concisely and impartially summarizes the measure and its major effect. This measure approves the ordinance authorizing the City Center(Downtown)Urban Renewal Plan Amendment,which increases the size of the urban renewal area by adding seven properties,or 37.70 acres. The Plan Amendment would not increase the approved$22 million cap for the Plan and would not impose new taxes. The original City Center(Downtown)Urban Renewal Plan(Plan)was approved by voters in 2006 and includes projects such as: •Street and streetscape improvements, •Bike and pedestrian improvements, •Park improvements,and •Support for public spaces and buildings As a result of the economic downturn,urban renewal district revenues are less than originally projected. The Plan Amendment provides additional capacity to complete those projects. Funding comes from capturing property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area. More information is available at www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal. A copy of the Plan and Plan Amendment are available at www.tigard-or.gov/DowntownPlan. Explanatory Statement 500 words that impartially explains the measure and its effect. If the county is producing a voters' pamphlet an explanatory statement must be drafted and attached to this form for: 4 any measure referred by the city governing body;or -->any initiative or referendum, if required by local ordinance. Explanatory Statement Attached? E]Yes ❑ No Authorized City Official Not required to be notarized. Name Title Mailing Address Contact Phone By signing this document: --) I hereby state that I am authorized by the city to submit this Notice of Measure Election;and 4 1 certify that notice of receipt of ballot title has been published and the ballot title challenge process for this measure completed. Signature Date Signed AIS-2989 8. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 60 Minutes Agenda Title: Quasi-judicial Public Hearing - Appeal: Triangle Medical Office Building at 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Prepared For: Gary Pagenstecher, Community Development Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Public Hearing - Quasi-Judicial Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall Council pass a Resolution to approve or deny the appeal, or issue any intermediate rulings as they see fit with respect to the subject appeal? This appeal is filed by Gordon R. Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust (the "Trust"), the owner of property immediately to the south and north of the subject property, and east across 72nd Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends Council deny the appeal and confirm the Planning Commission's findings to approve the proposed development with conditions identified in the Final Order. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Planning Commission approved a land use application for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.76-acre site in the Tigard Triangle Plan District. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking to be accessed indirectly from SW Dartmouth through the adjacent Walmart development, a pedestrian path through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot, and a partially protected, mitigated, and improved vegetated corridor along the northern property line. In addition, the applicant was conditioned to provide a crossover access agreement to benefit the adjacent Martin property to the south. The Planning Commission based its decision on the facts, findings and conclusions of the staff report to the Planning Commission, the applicant's narrative and plan set, and testimony at the October 17, November 14, and December 5, 2016 hearings. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to uphold the appeal and deny the application based on findings and conclusions they deem appropriate for the approval criteria that apply to the case. The review authority may also issue any intermediate rulings as they see fit. TDC18.390.050.E.3 COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS NA DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION None Attachments Resolution Memo to Council Notice of Appeal PC Final Order No. 2016-11 PC Minutes 12-5-16 Testimony 1-30-17 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17- A RESOLUTION AND FINAL ORDER DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S FINAL ORDER NO. 2016-11 APPROVING THE TIGARD TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR)2016-00011/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR) 2016- 00007)AND ADOPTING FINDINGS. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission initially reviewed this case at a public hearing at its meeting of October 17, 2016 and continued the hearing for additional testimony until November 14,2016;and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission again reviewed this case at a public hearing at its meeting of November 14, 2016 and continued the hearing for additional testimony until December 5,2016;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made motions to approve both the Concept and Detailed Plans by unanimous vote at the December 5,2016 hearing,and WHEREAS, Staff mailed the Final Order No. 2016-11 of the Planning Commission to interested parties on December 14,2016;and WHEREAS,the Appellant,Gordon R,Martin,Trustee of Tri-County Center Trust,having standing to appeal,timely filed a Notice to Appeal on December 22, 2016 addressing the applicable appeal procedures in TDC 18.390.040.G.2.a.11;and WHEREAS; the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of the Planning Commission's Final Order on February 7,2017;and WHEREAS, the City Council concluded that the proposed development adequately addressed all applicable approval criteria as contained in the Final Order No.2016-11 of the Planning Commission. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council denies the Martin appeal of PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007—Tigard Triangle Office Building—subject to the findings in Final Order No. 2016-11 of the Planning Commission,attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective when notice of the decision is mailed. PASSED: This day of 2017. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: Deputy City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 17- Page 1 City of Tigard Memorandum To: Mayor Cook, and City Councilors From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: Public Hearing for Appeal of Planning Commission Decision, Final Order No. 2016-011, to Approve Triangle Medical Office PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007 Date: January 31, 2017 Notice of Intent to Appeal: This appeal is filed by Gordon R. Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust (the 'Trust"), the owner of property immediately to the south and north of the subject property, and east across 72nd Avenue. The appellant believes the Elmhurst Street extension to the west of 72"d Avenue will be unknowingly, permanently and mistakenly blocked by the approved development,if the City Council does not act now to correct the mistake. Planning Commission Decision: The Commission approved a land use application for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.76-acre site in the Tigard Triangle plan district. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking to be accessed indirectly from SW Dartmouth through the adjacent Walmart development, a pedestrian path through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot, and a partially protected, mitigated, and improved vegetated corridor along the northern property line. In addition, the applicant was conditioned to provide a crossover access agreement to benefit the adjacent Martin property to the south. The Planning Commission based its decision on the facts, findings and conclusions of the staff report to the Planning Commission, the applicant's narrative and plan set, and testimony at the October 17,November 14, and December 5,2016 Commission hearings. Staff Response: Staff's position is indicated in the findings of the staff report to the Planning Commission in support of the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed development. Please see the Planning Commission's Final Order and Minutes from December 5, 2016 Commission Hearing attached to this AIS. 1-1 L V L.1 V L.L./ DEC 2 2 2016 City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD Z COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT t�l-A!gN!p.ar Nr-,?NEERING Land Use Decision Appeal Filing Form The City of Tigard supports citizen's right to participate in local REQUIRED SUBMITTAL government.The Tigard Community Development Code,therefore, ELEMENTS sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. Ing Fee Final Order No.2016-11 PC,Planned Development Review PDR2016-00011,SDR 2016-00007 YNarrative Property address/location(s): SW Corner of SW 72nd and Dartmouth; (address criteria 18.39 . 40.G.2.a_ii.) Washington County tax map 251018A,Tax Lot 00300. Deadline of appeal: January4,2017 Case No.(s): Neighbor Case Name(s): Interest in proposal (applicant, neighbor, etc.): Nei g Related Case No.(s): Appeal fee: d�,/ Date decision final: Notice of final decision: Appellant's name: Gordon R.Martin,Trustee of Tri-County Center Trust Business: Bill Kabeiseman, Bateman Seidel ❑ Type II Director's Decision to Address: 888 SW 5th Avenue,Suite 1250 HO/PC: Oregon 97204 ❑ expedited Review(Deposit): Portland, g Zip. ®/ HO/PC to City Council: Ph#: 503-972-9968 Email: billkab@batemanseidel.com Application accepted: (� Please indicate specific reasons for appeal or review: By: l--S Date: �T See attached. 1ACURPLN\Mesters\Land Use Apphutions Rw.10/02/2014 lam• kd M L< Appellant's signature Print name and title fj ov* ,, Date City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov 503-718-2421 Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED Notice of Appeal DEC 2 2 2016 CITY OF 11GARD PLANNINGi'ENGINEERING (A) Identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision; The decision being appealed is Final Order No. 2016-11 PC, a decision of the Tigard Planning Commission approving a Planned Development Review(PDR 2016-00011) and a Site Development Review(SDR 2016-00007). The decision was issued on December 13, 2016 and mailed on December 14, 2016. (B) Statement demonstrating the party filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal; This appeal is filed by Gordon R. Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust (the "Trust"), the owner of immediately property to the south, north and east across 72nd Avenue. The Trust has participated in the proceedings before the Planning Commission, as demonstrated by the attached letters that were submitted to the Planning Commission during the course of the proceedings. (C) Detailed statement of the specific issues raised on appeal; Because the November 8, 2016, election approved the continued City Council support and participation in the development of the Southwest Corridor project, this consequently results in a greater emphasis on making provisions for the connection between Beveland and Dartmouth Street(also referred to as 74th), and providing for new local street connections to 74th that would help keep traffic off 72nd Avenue and provide alternate routes to access the Southwest Corridor bridge over Hwy 217. As described below, we believe the Elmhurst Street extension to 74th has been unknowingly permanently and mistakenly blocked by the approved development, if the City Council does not act now to correct the mistake. The City Council should be aware that: • The development permanently blocks the Elmhurst Street extension; • City Code requires that a street connection be addressed as part of every development; • The street connection was discussed at the time of the pre-application; • The decision to approve the development relied upon a traffic study conclusion that mistakenly states the development would not preclude the Elmhurst Street extension. That conclusion is not analyzed and is unsupported by the traffic study; and • The Elmhurst Street extension will complete (68th to 74th) an additional Triangle east- west street connection and will reduce left turns onto westbound Dartmouth Street at the Dartmouth/72nd intersection. The extension serves more than 25 acres of CG zoned land and is a more direct route to the commercial area. Why the development permanently blocks the Elmhurst Street Extension: • The normal projected street pattern for the Elmhurst extension shown the applicant's material is impractical because: • A street grade over 12% is required for over 250 feet to implement the Elmhurst extension and that grade would violate City Code. • The land under the normal projected street pattern is topographically constrained and excavation greater than 20 feet is needed which leaves most of the land it is to cross through undevelopable. • A 7,800 square foot residence in good condition blocks the path of the normal projected street pattern. When the Planning Commission determined the applicant's Future Concept Street Plan was feasible, it effectively considered the projected street pattern for Elmhurst to be feasible as well. The applicant's attorney argued in a letter to the City November 14, 2016, that a feasible street does not imply the street is likely to be attained or must be reasonable or cannot violate City Code. According to the applicant, a"feasible" street only considers whether it is possible to attain the street. The Planning Commission never saw a discussion of whether the applicant's proposed street pattern for an Elmhurst extension was impractical. Information we submitted that showed the street was impractical was apparently disregarded because the Planning Commission, in effect, mistakenly claimed the projected street pattern of Elmhurst Street needed to only be feasible. If the City Council agrees that the applicant's projected street pattern for the Elmhurst extension is impractical, City Code requires that the street be reconfigured if possible before determining the street to be precluded. There are two main reconfiguration options for the Elmhurst extension: • Extend Elmhurst along and adjacent to the backyards of homes on Hermosa Way. This is impractical because the same topographic problems exist, street spacing is not sensible, and equitable block design as City Code requires is not implemented. • Extend Elmhurst Street as shown in the review prepared on behalf of the City by Laurence Qamar. This is the only known reconfiguration of the Elmhurst Street extension that is not impractical. The reconfiguration is also the least impactful, safest because it is more ADA friendly, has about an 8% grade, and with some adjustment does not preclude the development. If the development, as approved by the Planning Commission, is built, Option 2 will no longer exist and the Elmhurst Street extension will be precluded because there are no other known street reconfigurations that are not impractical. As stated, the approval of this application effectively precluded the Elmhurst Street extension will be effectively precluded, significantly impacting both the future street pattern of the Tigard Triangle and the Southwest Corridor. (D) Statement demonstrating that the specific issues raised on appeal were raised during the comment period, except when the appeal is filed by the applicant; The issues raised in this appeal were discussed in letters to the Planning Commission dated October 13, 2016, October 31, 2016,November 7, 2016,November 14, 2016, November 21, 2016 and December 5, 2016. Accordingly, the issues were raised during the comment period before the Planning Commission. 120 DAYS (with 45 day extension) = 2/7/2017 DATE OF FILING: 12/13/2016 DATE MAILED: 12/14/2016 CITY OF TIGARD ' Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2016-11 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Number: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR2016-00011, SDR 2016-00007 Case Name: TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE Applicant's Name/Address: Base Camp I, LLC, Brian Bennett, 29080 SW Pete's Mountain Rd, West Linn, OR 97068 Owner's Name/Address: Base Camp I,LLC, 1399 Franklin Blvd, Eugene, OR,97403 Address of Property: Southwest of the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street; Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington County Tax Map 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00300 A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR A 36,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ON A 3.76-ACRE SITE IN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE AND PLAN SET, AND TESTIMONY AT THE OCTOBER 17, NOVEMBER 14, AND DECEMBER 5, 2016 COMMISSION HEARINGS. Request: ➢ The applicant requests concurrent Planned Development Concept Plan and Detailed Development Plan review for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.76 acre vacant parcel located southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface pparking taking access indirectly from SW Dartmouth through the adjacent Walmart development. A pedestrian path is proposed through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot.A vegetated corridor along the northern property line is partially protected,mitigated,and improved. Zone: C-G:general commercial district. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 1 . 45, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested ff] Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record within the Required Distance Zx Affected Government Agencies 0 Interested Parties 19 The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard Permit Center at City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 14, 2016 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 5 2017 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal. The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any arty with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 8.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are avaable from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Bou1cN ard, Ti,rard, Orcgoti 972123. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON LANUARY 4, 2017. Questions: 1 f N<ou have any questions,please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 718-2434. NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2016-011 e PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR A 36,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ON A 3.76-ACRE SITE IN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ITS DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE AND PLAN SET, AND TESTIMONY AT THE OCTOBER 17, NOVEMBER 14,AND DECEMBER 5, 2016 COMMISSION HEARINGS. 120 DAYS (with 45 day extension) = 2/7/2017 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING CASE NOS.: Planned Development Review (PDR) PDR2016-00011 Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2016-00007 REQUEST: The applicant requests concurrent Planned Development Concept Plan and Detailed Development Plan review for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.76 acre vacant parcel located southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking taking access indirectly from SW Dartmouth through the adjacent Walmart development. A pedestrian path is proposed through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot. A vegetated corridor along the northern property line is partially protected, mitigated, and improved. APPLICANT: Base Camp I,LLC Brian Bennett 29080 SW Pete's Mountain Rd West Linn, OR 97068 OWNER: Base Camp I,LLC 1399 Franklin Blvd Eugene, OR, 97403 LOCATION: Southwest of the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street; Washington County Tax Map 2S101BA,Tax Lot 00300. ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: C-G: general commercial district. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. The property is subject to an existing Planned Development (PD) overlay. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 1 OF 40 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.350, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION The Planning Commission finds that the proposed Planned Development Concept Plan and Detailed Plan will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and conditionally meets the Approval Standards as outlined in Section VI of this decision. Therefore, the Planning Commission APPROVES the proposed development subject to the following Conditions of Approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY SITE WORK_ The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the Community Development Department Attn: Gary Pagenstecher, 503-718-2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to any site work, the project arborist shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. 2. The project arborist shall perform semimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the project planner within one week of the site inspection. 3. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a fee for the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan of 55 planted trees in the amount of$1,750 ($154 first tree + $1,596 ($28 x 57 additional trees). 4. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a tree establishment bond in the amount of$25,300 (55 planted trees x$460/tree). 5. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing visual clearance areas at proposed intersections. 6. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded 10-foot wide public bike/pedestrian access easement across the subject property from SW 72nd Avenue to the western property line with Walmart. The easement shall also include that portion of the Walmart site that is subject to the existing easement agreement to allow safe access to Walmart's existing pedestrian facilities,if permitted by Walmart. 7. Prior to any site work,the applicant shall submit site line studies and design details of proposed roof-mounted equipment screening for review and approval. 8. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan to include convenient bike and pedestrian improvements within the required bike/pedestrian easement area including an extension of the six foot scored concrete path, curb cuts,crosswalk striping, and signage on the Walmart site,if permitted by Walmart. 9. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows the walkway surface materials, lighting and signing are designed as needed for safety purposes. 10. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that jnm ides the ability of 1ie�p�� PDR201fr00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE�it,:Dt{;:11,OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 2 OF 40 the southwest to connect via parking lot access and provide a recorded access/egress easement for future parking area crossover connections. Adjacent property owners must independently obtain access rights over Walmart's property. 11. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit detailed plans of any service facilities demonstrating that they are screened from view. 12. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a Pride Disposal service provider letter to demonstrate the proposed storage facility can be accessed and serviced as shown on Sheet A2. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan,503-718-2642) for review and approval: 13. Prior to commencing site improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover all infrastructure work, storm water treatment facilities and any other work in the public right-of-way or work to public facilities. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Division. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tigard-or.gov). 14. Prior to commencing site improvements, submittal of the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Division will delay processing of project documents. 15. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Jonny Gish, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Jonny Gish, Engineering, 503-718-2467). 16. The Applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on any adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application,and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 17. Prior to PFI, Applicant's plans shall show provision for stormwater runoff from upstream parcels to the south. 18. Prior to commencing site improvements, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and storm water quality details shall be provided to the city for review and approval as part of the PFI permit plans. 19. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 20. Prior to commencing site improvements,a 1200-CN permit is required. 21. Prior to commencing site improvements, a final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. 22. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations from the submitted geotechnical report by GeoDesign, dated March 2, 2016, into the final grading plan. The geotechnical engineer shall be employed by the applicant throughout the entire construction period to ensure that all grading, including cuts and fills, are constructed in accordance with the approved plan and Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy PDR2016-00011/SD1L�I I1G-(xKK)7-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 3 OF 40 permit. 23. Prior to commencing site improvements, the Applicant shall submit final design plans and calculations for the on-site storm water facilities,including any improvements/replacement needed to the existing plantings in the water quality facility. The plans must be reviewed and approved before issuance of a site permit. 24. Prior to commencing site improvements, the Applicant shall obtain a Clean Water Services (CWS) Storm water Connection Authorization prior to issuance of the City of Tigard PFI permit. Plans shall be submitted to the City of Tigard for review. The city will forward plans to CWS after preliminary review. 25. Prior to commencing site improvements, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for all public water line improvements. Any extension of public water lines or work in a right-of-way shall be shown on the proposed Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit construction plans. 26. Prior to commencing site improvements, the applicant will be required to provide written approval from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue for fire flow, hydrant placement and access prior to issuance of the City of Tigard's site permit. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 503-718-2642) for review and approval: 27. Prior to issuance of a building permit, submit the number of suites to be addressed and pay the addressing fee. (Oscar Contreras, 503-718-2687). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the Community Development Department Attn: Gary Pagenstecher, 503-718-2434. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 28. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall call for a planning inspection to ensure the completed project was built according to the approved plans. Submit to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan,503-718-2642) for review and approval: 29. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 30. A joint use and maintenance agreement shall be executed and recorded on City standard forms for all common driveways. The agreement shall be referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel Deeds. The agreement shall be approved by the Engineering Department prior to recording. 31. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit as-built drawings tied to the GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). As-built submittal shall include an Acrobat (***.pdo file, one 11x17 paper copy and the electronic point file as state above and shown in the example below. Excel spreadsheet/point database file example: "Feature";"Type";"XCOORD";"YCOORD"; "ZCOORD"• "SSMH02";"MH";"7456992234";"6299769.979";"192.45" PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-(X1007-TRIANGLF.MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 40F 40 "WV03", "WV", 6'7456956.654","6298723.587',"214.05 32. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into an agreement on City forms for the maintenance of any on-site water quality facilities that will ensure compliance with the requirements of the manufacture. Submit a maintenance plan as required by CWS Design Standards for other types of facilities. 33. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Contech, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 34. Applicant shall comply with CWS requirements, as specified in the Service Provider Letter. This includes providing all onsite vegetated corridor planting, any offsite mitigation and maintenance of these facilities for a minimum two-year period. 35. Applicant shall assure for two-years, bond or cash, the maintenance of the private water quality facilities and vegetated corridor. THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DETAILED PLAN APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR SEVEN YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION PDR201G-00011/SDR201G-INK)07-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 5 OF 40 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION First Planning Commission Hearing The Planning Commission continued the October 17, 2016 hearing to November 14th to further consider the proposed Concept Plan and review of the Detailed Plan. The Commission held the record open for 14 days through October 3180,with a 7-day response period for all parties through November 7th. The Commission's direction to the applicant included 1) providing cross sections of the site to better understand how the proposed development relates to site topography, 2) identify any private property rights with respect to adjacent property owners, and 3) clarify issues related to the proposed pedestrian connection to the adjacent Walmart site. Specifically,Commissioners asked: • When you come back on a more detailed development plan, I would like examples to visualize why a 20-foot wall is needed and why a ten-foot wall wouldn't. It would be helpful to have examples of that to help visualize on the detailed portion, once we get to that. • Regarding private property rights, I would like to see more effort than what appears to have been made. I believe we have to be very cognoscente when we're potentially impeding someone's ability to use their property. • I'd like to better understand how people in the neighborhood would be able to cut across this property to access the Walmart area. • Can you show the pedestrian entrance on 72nd in those models if you have drawings. That would be helpful. I would like to see how that pedestrian access would work. Testimony through October 318` The testimony submitted by Bill Kabeiseman dated October 31, 2016 restates a position in opposition, but focuses on Concept Plan approval criteria 1, 3,and 6 as not being met citing insufficient protection of natural features,lack of fair and equitable access,and lack of amenities that enhance the project or neighborhood. The testimony submitted by Dana Krawczuk dated October 31, 2016 responds to questions and concerns raised in prior testimony and at the October 17d' Commission hearing, and provides additional information and exhibits in response to the Commission's direction. Response testimony through November Th Additional testimony submitted by Bill Kabeiseman dated November 7, 2016 restates the position in opposition, and focuses on Elmhurst Street extension alternatives proposed by the applicant as being unreasonable and that outstanding drainage issues may be resolved in discussion with the applicant. Additional testimony submitted by Dana Krawczuk dated November 7, 2016 responds to the points raised in the prior Kabeiseman letter, and argues for approval of the Concept Plan as proposed. In addition, in the event of an appeal, the applicant requests a procedure that will allow the Commission to vote on both the Concept and Detailed plans at the same hearing by making a tentative decision on the Concept Plan until the Detailed Plan is ready for approval. Concept Plan Approval Criteria vs Detailed Plan Approval Standards The six planned development concept plan approval criteria are broadly drawn with certain suggested outcomes,but they leave discretion on how those outcomes are achieved and even to what level of achievement is expected. They inform developers and the community as to what issues will be addressed during the detailed plan review process. Concept plan approval criteria must be met first, as part of planned development review to set the parameters for development of the detailed plan. In contrast, the Tigard Triangle District design standards are more specific and quantitative, but they also allow for PDR2016d10011/SDR2016d00007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 6 OF 40 different design solutions to implement them. They address several important guiding principles adopted for the Tigard Triangle Plan District, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. Staff issues with respect to concept plan findings Criteria 1: The applicant's basic assumption of a single-story building and level site is dictated by the requirements of the medical use tenant.The application did not address alternatives that would otherwise protect the landform, or slope, that is a natural feature of the site. However, through discussions with the applicant, staff is aware that the applicant's proposal protects more of the vegetated corridor than a prior 1998 approval on the site and acknowledges that the proposed building was modified to accommodate the minimum buffering of a jurisdictional wetland as allowed by Clean Water Services. Do the proposed open space areas adequately protect the natural features of the site, or should the applicant find ways to preserve additional veetated corridor to the north or step improvements with the grade to improve the project's relationship to SW 72° Avenue on the east? Criteria 6: This criterion requires protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. The applicant states that "the project provides a higher quality of architectural features, that the future building will follow the guidance of the Tigard Triangle Plan District design standards, which will enhance the aesthetics of the surrounding area through incorporating unique architectural details, high quality building materials, and landscaping." However, some Triangle design standards were not addressed in the applicant's detailed plan findings that relate to the building's primary relationship to the public street, SW 72°d Avenue. Does the proposal sufficiently protect natural features or provide additional amenities that enhance the neighborhood that are not otherwise available? Staff issues with respect to detailed plan findings The Commission has discretion to exempt specific development standards in the 700 Chapters of the development code. However, for those chapters not specifically exempted (e.g. district specific standards including the Tigard Triangle District, 18.620), the applicant bears the burden of fully complying with those standards,unless a variance or adjustment has been requested. The interface of a building with the public street is a primary focus of the Tigard Triangle District site and building design standards, aimed principally to benefit the pedestrian experience and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. In this case, the single-story building program dictated by the tenant is in conflict with the site's topography and is most evident along the SW 72nd Street frontage. Although a number of the site and building design standards are not met with the applicant's proposed design, and would not meet the variance criteria if applied for, certain recommended conditions of approval could bring the design into compliance. These conditions are included in the findings for each standard in Section VI, below and listed selectively here: • The applicant shall submit a revised site plan demonstrating the proposed building meets the maximum 10- foot building setback along SW 72nd Avenue. • The applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing landscaping,raised planters,with benches and/or other street furnishings along the length of the building of at least three feet in depth behind the back of curb along SW 72nd Avenue. • The applicant shall submit revised site and landscape plans that show the L-1 landscaping standards are met at sidewalk level between the parking lot and SW 72nd Avenue. • The applicant shall submit dimensioned elevations of the eastern facade demonstrating that the minimum 50 percent ground floor window requirement is met. • The applicant shall submit dimensioned elevations of the eastern building fagade demonstrating the building facades standard requiring articulation at least every 50 feet is met. PDR201G-00011/SDIL111G-(X1007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 7 OF 40 Discussions with the Applicant Prior to issuing this staff report, Staff discussed these issues with the applicant to better understand the circumstances and tradeoffs associated with the proposed design and to create an opportunity for the applicant to revise their plans to meet the standards and provide them for Commission review and consideration at the November 14`'' hearing. It is possible that the Commission's decision on the concept plan, assuming approval with further direction to the applicant, may change elements of the proposed detailed plans. Staff has prepared findings for the detailed plan to facilitate the Commission's deliberation, but not to prejudice the Commission toward approval of the proposed detailed plan in advance of the concept plan decision. Site History and Vicinity Information: The subject ±3.76-acre property is located approximately 100 feet southwest of the SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue intersection. The site has 358 feet of frontage along SW 72nd Avenue. Site topography generally slopes downward approximately 50 feet in elevation over 620 feet in length (8 percent) diagonally from the southeast corner adjacent to the 72nd Ave to the northwest corner at the adjacent Walmart access way. A drainageway for an unnamed tributary to Red Rock Creek and jurisdictional wetlands are located primarily off-site with a portion of wetlands and their associated vegetated corridor buffers extending onto the subject site. Clean Water Services approval has been obtained requiring on and off-site mitigation. The wetland area is not designated as Significant by the City of Tigard;therefore, a Sensitive Lands Review is not required. The site was originally used for agricultural purposes until later developed for residential use in the nineteen fifties, with city records showing demolition of a duplex in 2000,resulting in a vacant parcel. The city issued SIT2016-00015 on September 21, 2016 for grading of the site in preparation for future site improvements associated with the subject proposal. The applicant accepts any risk that the grading plan approved through the land use approval process may change from the preliminary grading plan on which the site permit was issued. In other words, the city's issuance of the site permit should not prejudice the Planning Commission's deliberation and decision on the proposed Concept and Detailed Plans. Proposal Description: Base Camp I, LLC proposes a 36,000-square foot, single-story medical office building. Primary access is proposed from the west indirectly from SW Dartmouth over an established private access easement granted by Walmart. Utilities are readily available to serve the property. One hundred and sixty surface parking spaces are proposed on the south and west portions of the site, located behind and to the side of the building. To address the approximately six percent slope of the adjacent 72nd Avenue right-of-way with the proposed flattened site and single-story construction, the east facade of the proposed building is set back ten to twelve feet from back of sidewalk and built 30 feet in height. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET AND INTERESTED PARTIES The applicant held a formal neighborhood meeting on April 7, 2016 with eight participants attending. Discussion points included the stream and wetlands on the adjacent Tax Lot 100, trees on site, access, and site and building design features. Written comments dated September 15" and October 13`s were received from Bateman/Seidel, attorneys for Gordon Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust, which owns property adjacent to the subject property. This testimony's primary interest is in the extension of SW Elmhurst to equitably serve the future development of his client's property,but raises other wide-ranging issues,as well. In addition, the applicant's attorney, Dana Krawczuk, submitted letters dated October 7`'' and 17'h in rebuttal to the Bateman Seidel letters. PDR2016-(Ml l/SDR_201G-00007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 8 OF 40 SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS This section lists the Development Code Chapters that are applicable to this decision in the order in which they are addressed. 18.350 Planned Developments 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts 18.620 Tigard Triangle Plan District 18.705 Access, Egress and Circulation 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan 18.795 Vision Clearance Areas 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 18.350.020 Process A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones.An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. In the early nineteen eighties the Planning Commission applied the Planned Development overlay zone to portions of the Tigard Triangle,including the subject property;therefore, a Planned Development Review is required. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2.The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The planned development review process requires both concept plan and a detailed plan approval by the Commission. The planned development overlay zone is existing. C. Decision-making process. 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. 4.Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separating these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detailed plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. The applicant has applied for concurrent review and has agreed to have the plans heard at separate hearings to ensure the Commission's direction on the concept plan is carried forward to the detailed plan. PDR201G-0X111/SDR2010-00007-'TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE.9 OF 40 D. Concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed plan. In the case of concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed development plan, including subdivision applications, the applicant shall clearly distinguish the concept from the detailed plan. The Planning Commission shall take separate actions on each element of the planned development application (i.e., the concept approval must precede the detailed development approval); however each required action may be made at the same hearing. The request for concurrent review and for separate hearings for the concept and detailed plans is efficient for the applicant having to initiate only one application while still getting the benefit of Commission review of the concept plan at a separate hearing.At staff's request the applicant prepared a separate concept plan packet for the first Planning Commission hearing. However, the balance of the application for the detailed plan review will be sent with the concept plan packet to provide the Commission with background information that may prove useful in better understanding the proposed design and any issue areas Commissioners may have. 18.350.030 Administrative Provisions A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. The concept plan approval expires after 1-1/2 years unless an application for detailed development plan and, if applicable, a preliminary plat approval or request for extension is filed.Action on the detailed development plan shall be taken by the Planning Commission by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria in Section 18.350.070. The applicant has requested concurrent review of the concept and detailed plan. The decision by the Commission on the concept plan will be valid for 18 months or until a detailed plan decision is approved within that period. B. Zoning map designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. The zoning map shall be amended to indicate the approved planned development designation for the subject development site. The approval of the planned development overlay zone shall not expire. The planned development overlay is existing. 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria The concept plan may be approved by the commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. As shown on the Concept Site Plan (Sheet C0O2) and the Concept Grading Plan (Sheet C003) the project includes specific areas of open space on the north and south ends of the property. An existing vegetated corridor located on the north side of the site (13.3 percent of the site) will be partially preserved as open space and enhanced with new plantings as determined through Clean Water Service's Service Provider Letter (SPL). Permanent impacts to the vegetated corridor (0.12 acres) will be mitigated through both on- site and off-site restoration planting. The open space will be passive in nature, observable from views from SW 72nd and Dartmouth Streets, as well as by the employees and customers of the proposed building and the adjacent Walmart. The proposed open space augments the unnamed tributary to Red Rock Creek, jurisdictional wetlands, and their associated vegetated corridor to the north located on Tax Lot 100,which is a mitigation site resulting from the adjacent Walmart site development. Retaining walls mitigate further encroachment of the proposed building and parking areas. The triangular landscaping area to the south (16.3 percent of the site) contains the significant cut bank that would allow the proposed single-story building and level development site. The proposed retaining wall would be approximately 20 feet high at SW 72nd Avenue and taper to zero feet over two thirds of the site length to the west. In addition, a pedestrian path is proposed through this open space along the top of the wall, which is shown connecting SW 72nd Avenue to the Walmart site. PDR2016-00011/SDR201(r00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 10 OF 40 The applicant states that the proposed medical use requires a single-story building and level site and that the plan demonstrates that the vegetated corridor is protected to the greatest extent practicable. The applicant's basic assumption of a single-story building and level site is dictated by the requirements of the medical use tenant. Therefore, the applicant has not addressed alternatives that would otherwise protect the landform, or slope, that is a natural feature of the site. Provided the Commission agrees with the applicant,given the requirements of this particular use, that the proposed open space areas adequately protect the natural features of the site, then this criterion is met. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of trees and other natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection,preservation,and/or management. As shown on Existing Conditions Plan (Sheet C001), of the 12 on-site trees, the applicant proposes to retain the three property-line conifers located in the southeast corner of the property. The 50-foot regulated vegetated corridor is also shown on C0O1. The proposed development would permanently encroach on 0.12 acres of the buffer, with the buffer being as little as 23 feet wide at the least extent. The Concept Site Plan (Sheet C002) shows how the proposed building and parking lot are arranged to minimize the impact to the vegetated corridor to the greatest extent practicable, given the proposed development plan. The Clean Water Services SPL identifies on-site and off-site mitigation for the impacted corridor.This criterion is met. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. As shown on the Concept Neighborhood Plan (Sheet C007), the applicant states that future development will integrate with the existing neighborhood by providing similar uses and incorporating architectural styles required by the Tigard Triangle Plan District standards. The plan shows medical offices across SW 72"d Avenue to the east and single-story developments surrounding the site. As shown on the Concept Landscape and Utility Plan (Sheet C004), the applicant proposes a buffer to transition between planned commercial uses on site and existing residential uses located to the south.The location of the buffer accounts for the effect of the proposed retaining wall to effectively screen the project towards the east end of the site. The Concept Neighborhood Plan also shows a conceptual future street location that anticipates the extension of SW Elmhurst Street to connect with a planned extension of SW 74`h Street along the eastern edge of the Walmart site. Although these streets are not shown in the current 2010 Transportation System Plan (TSP) for the City of Tigard, they are a projection of the requirements of the connectivity standards in the Tigard Triangle District (18.620.020) and the 2015 Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan TrSP). The TTSP shows the Elmhurst extension from SW 72"d Avenue to the Walmart site as a local pedestrian oriented street with on-street parking within a 60-foot right-of-way. The applicant's proposed conceptual alignment of SW Elmhurst is the subject of interest by neighbors owning property adjacent to the subject site over which the alignment traverses. See attached comment letter from Mr. Bateman. The objective of staff, in this case, is to ensure that a feasible alignment is preserved and that the proposed development does not preclude the connection where it is,arguably, not required at this time.This criterion is met. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops,etc. The applicant states that walkability will be promoted through the creation of a new pedestrian connection between SW 72nd Avenue and the existing Walmart property to the west.The new pedestrian way will be within a public access easement, and will provide a shorter, safer, and a more pedestrian-friendly route rather than following SW 72nd Avenue north to SW Dartmouth Street. It will also provide a shorter route to access area destinations for transit riders who utilize the existing TriMet stop for Route 78 near SW 69th Avenue and SW Beveland Street. Bicycle parking is also planned on site,which will promote cycling.This criterion is met. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of proiects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized PDR201(x00011/SDR2016-(XM7—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 11 OF 40 lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. As shown on Concept Site Plan (Sheet C002), the entire site is planned for commercial/medical uses, with the exception of areas necessary to preserve natural features or provide required parking and landscaping. Known vegetated corridor areas on the north side of the site will be preserved to the greatest extent possible, enhanced, and expanded in some areas. A buffer will be established to create a transition to residential uses located to the south. The future building will be located near SW 72nd Avenue to comply with maximum setback requirements. Therefore, parking areas are limited to central and western portions of the property. This criterion is met. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. The applicant states that"this project involves a new medical office building,which is planned to include permitted uses allowed in the CG zone and will be built to comply with the development standards of the zone. The project also provides for open space/natural resource preservation and enhancement. The plan has a significant advantage over standard development because it provides a higher quality of architectural features and includes pedestrian and bicycle amenities. The future building will follow the guidance of the Tigard Triangle Plan District design standards, which will enhance the aesthetics of the surrounding area through incorporating unique architectural details, high quality building materials, and landscaping. A new pedestrian connection is planned from SW 72nd Avenue to the adjacent Walmart property. The new pedestrian way will be within a public access easement, and will provide a shorter, safer, and a more pedestrian-friendly route rather than following SW 72nd Avenue north to SW Dartmouth Street. It will also provide a shorter route to access area destinations for transit riders who utilize the TriMet bus stops for Route 78."This criterion is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed concept plan meets all of the concept plan approval criteria. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the concept plan, as proposed. However, through the public hearing process, the Commission may find alternative approaches that better meet the approval criteria. The Commission shall provide clear direction to the applicant for preparation of the detailed plan to be heard at a time certain established by the Commission. 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following criteria are met: A. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: 1. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; 2. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; 3. The change involves a change in use; 4. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and 5. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements. Upon approval of the Concept Plan, a Detailed Plan may be approved if found consistent with the approved Concept Plan. B. All the provisions of the land division provisions, Chapters 18.420, Partitions, and 18.430, Subdivisions, shall be met if applicable; No land division is proposed.These chapters are not applicable. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 12 OF 40 C. Except as noted, the provisions of the following chapters shall be utilized as guidelines. A planned development need not meet these requirements where a development plan provides alternative designs and methods, if acceptable to the commission that promotes the purpose of this chapter. In each case, the applicant must provide findings to justify the modification of the standards in the chapters listed below. The applicant shall respond to all the applicable criteria of each chapter as part of these findings and clearly identify where their proposal is seeking a modification to the strict application of the standards. For those chapters not specifically exempted, the applicant bears the burden of fully complying with those standards, unless a variance or adjustment has been requested. 1. Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review. The provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, are not applicable to planned development reviews. The detailed development plan review is intended to address the same type of issues as the site development review. 2. Chapter 18.705,Access, Egress and Circulation. The commission may grant an exception to the access standards, upon a demonstration by a professional engineer that the resulting access will not be detrimental to the public safety considering emergency vehicle needs, and provisions are provided for all modes of transportation using the site (vehicles,bicycles,pedestrians, and transit). 3. Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district, using the minimum lot size established for that district. Where a project site encompasses more than one underlying zoning district, density shall be aggregated for each district, and may be allocated anywhere within the project site, as deemed appropriate by the commission. 4. Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. The commission may grant an exception to the landscape requirements of this title upon a finding that the overall landscape plan was prepared by a licensed landscape architect, provides for 20% of the net site area to be professionally landscaped, and meets the intent of the specific standard being modified. 5. Chapter 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. The commission may grant an exception to the off-street parking dimensional and minimum number of space requirements in the applicable zone ih a. The minimum number of parking spaces is not reduced by more than 10% of the required parking; and b. The application is for a use designed for a specific purpose which is intended to be permanent in nature, e.g., a nursing home, and which has a low demand for off-street parking; or c. There is an opportunity for sharing parking and there is written evidence that the property owners are willing to enter into a legal agreement; or d. Public transportation is available to the site, and reducing the standards will not adversely affect adjoining uses; or e. There is a community interest in the preservation of particular natural features of the site which make it in the public interest to grant an exception to parking standards. 6. Chapter 18.780, Signs. The commission may grant an exception to the sign dimensional requirements in the applicable zone if: a. The sign is not increased by more than 10% of the required applicable dimensional standard for signs; and b. The exception is necessary for adequate visibility of the sign on the property; and c. The sign will be compatible with the overall site plan, the structural improvements and with the structures and uses on adjoining properties. 7. Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas. The commission may grant an exception to the visual clearance requirements,when adequate sight distance is or can be met; 8. Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Improvements, Sections 18.810.040, Blocks, and 18.810.060, Lots. Deviations from street standards shall be made on a limited basis, and nothing in this section shall obligate the city engineer to grant an exception. The commission has the authority to reject an exception request. The commission can only grant an exception to street sanctions if it is sanctioned by the city engineer. The city engineer may determine that certain exceptions to the street and utility standards are permissible when it can be shown that: a. Public safety will not be compromised; and b. In the case of public streets, maintenance costs will not be greater than with a conforming design; and c. The design will improve stormwater conveyance either by reducing the rate or amount of runoff from present standards or increasing the amount of pollutant treatment. PDR2016-00011/SDR2010-(X1007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD 1'\GE 13 OF 40 Chapters 18.360 and 18.715 of the above listed chapters do not apply to the proposed commercial planned development. The applicant has not requested any exceptions to the requirements of the applicable chapters above. The applicant's narrative provides findings for the applicable standards below, without exception. For those chapters not specifically exempted (e.g. district specific standards including the Tigard Triangle District, 18.620), the applicant bears the burden of fully complying with those standards,unless a variance or adjustment has been requested. D. In addition, the following criteria shall be met: 1. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: a. The streets, buildings and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible. The commission may require the applicant to provide an alternate site plan to demonstrate compliance with this criterion; The applicant states that "As shown on Sheet C100 of the preliminary detailed plans (Exhibit A), and as described in the Natural Resource Assessment (Exhibit E), the planned building and parking area have been located to preserve the vegetated corridor to the maximum extent feasible." An unnamed tributary to Red Rock Creek, jurisdictional wetlands, and their associated vegetated corridor are located north of the subject site on Tax Lot 100. Tax Lot 100 is itself a mitigation site since approximately 2000, resulting from development of the adjacent Walmart site. An extension of the vegetated corridor from Tax Lot 100 onto the north side of the subject site (13.3 percent of the site) will be partially preserved as open space and enhanced with new plantings as determined through Clean Water Service's Service Provider Letter (SPL). According to the SPL, permanent impacts to the vegetated corridor (0.12 acres) will be mitigated through both on-site and off-site restoration planting. Since CWS has the authority to regulate the vegetated corridor, the City can conclude that the natural drainage associated with it is preserved to the greatest degree possible,given the proposed development. The applicant further states that "The site will be graded as necessary in order to provide a relatively flat site for a single story building, which is important for a medical facility where many of the patrons will likely have limited mobility." The applicant's basic assumption of a single-story building and level site is dictated by the requirements of the medical use tenant. Therefore, the applicant has not addressed alternatives that would otherwise protect the landform, or slope, that is a natural feature of the site,while still accommodating staff and clients of the medical offices. At the October 17'' hearing the Commission asked the applicant to provide cross sections through the site to better understand how the proposed development relates to the site's topography. Provided the Commission agrees with the applicant that the buildings and other site elements,including surface parking, are designed and located to preserve the existing topography to the greatest degree possible,then this criterion is met. Alternatively, the Commission may require the applicant to provide an alternate site plan to demonstrate compliance with this criterion. b. Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding as demonstrated by the inclusion of a specific geotechnical evaluation; and A geotechnical report (Exhibit M) was prepared by GeoDesign Engineering dated March 2, 2016. Subsurface conditions were found to be suitable for the planned development.Therefore, this criterion is met. c. Using the basic site analysis information from the concept plan submittal, the structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind directions,where possible. The applicant states that"The planned structure is sited with the longest sides of the building having an east-west orientation,maximizing exposure for solar and wind." Given the site topography,the proposed single story building would be shielded somewhat from winds from the south. The long southern-facing fagade of the building would allow the greatest potential for solar gain. Therefore, this criterion is met. 2. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: PDR2()1G-00011/SDR.�011r(XKx)7-A)16MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 14 OF 40 a. Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses; e.g., between single-family and multifamily residential, and residential and commercial uses; b. In addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix (Table 18.745.1), the requirements of the buffer may be reduced if a landscape plan prepared by a registered landscape architect is submitted that attains the same level of buffering and screening with alternate materials or methods. The following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.745: i. The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; ii. The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; iii. The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; iv.The required density of the buffering; and v.Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. c. On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such activities as service areas, storage areas, parking lots and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: i.What needs to be screened; ii. The direction from which it is needed; and iii.Whether the screening needs to be year-round. Adjacent uses to the subject property include a similar use (retail commercial) to the west,undeveloped wetland area to the north, a full improved SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way to the east, and single-family residential uses to the south. Table 18.745.1 requires a D-level Buffer between a single family residence and parking lots in excess of 50 spaces. In this case, due to intervening topography, the western portion of the proposed parking lot would be visible from the existing dwelling located approximately 100 feet up-slope. The applicant states that "The project complies with Option 2 with a six-foot tall fence and shrubs within a 15-foot wide buffer. However, as shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheet L100), buffering and screening of the planned parking area includes trees and ground cover,but no shrubs and the fence height and material is not called out on the plan. Further analysis is necessary to determine whether the proposed buffering and screening is adequate. In addition, it is likely that vehicle circulation will be required between the subject site and the adjacent site to the south when redeveloped,which may inform the design of the D-level buffer screening. At the December 5,2016 hearing, the applicant submitted a revised landscape plan that details the buffer and screening elements to meet the requirements in Tables 18.745.1 and 2. This criterion is met. 3. Privacy and noise. Nonresidential structures which abut existing residential dwellings shall be located on the site or be designed in a manner, to the maximum degree possible, to protect the private areas on the adjoining properties from view and noise; As shown on sheets L100-L102 of the preliminary plans (Exhibit A), numerous trees, a retaining wall, and fence are planned within the buffer, which will separate the medical office building from the adjacent homes to the south. This barrier will provide ample distance and grade separation between to the two uses to prevent any potential impacts pertaining to privacy and noise that the planned commercial use may have on a residential use. As conditioned above for a refinement of the proposed buffering and screening plan, this criterion is met. 4. Exterior elevations—Single-family attached and multiple-family structures. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: a. Recesses, e.g., decks,patios, entrances, floor area,of a minimum depth of eight feet; b. Extensions, e.g., decks,patios, entrances, floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet; and c. Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height. The project is commercial for a medical office use. This criterion does not apply. 5. Private outdoor area—Residential use: PDR201(r00011/SDR2016-INNN17-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 15 OF 40 a. Exclusive of any other required open space facility,each ground-level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, or porch) of not less than 48 square feet with a minimum width dimension of four feet; b. Wherever possible,private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and c. Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space. The project is commercial for a medical office use.This criterion does not apply. 6. Shared outdoor recreation and open space facility areas—Residential use: a. Exclusive of any other required open space facilities, each residential dwelling development shall incorporate shared usable outdoor recreation areas within the development plan as follows: i. Studio units up to and including two bedroom units,200 square feet per unit; ii.Three or more bedroom units,300 square feet per unit. b. Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable from adjacent units for reasons of crime prevention and safety; c.The required recreation space may be provided as follows: i.Additional outdoor passive use open space facilities; ii.Additional outdoor active use open space facilities; iii. Indoor recreation center; or iv.A combination of the above. The project is commercial for a medical office use.This criterion does not apply. 7.Access and circulation: a.The number of required access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 18.705; Findings for Chapter 18.705 Access, Egress, and Circulation are provided below, which fully address how the project complies with all applicable requirements of that chapter, including the 50-foot access with 40-foot paved with curbs requirement for a single access serving parking lots in excess of 100 spaces.This criterion is met. b. All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency and service vehicles; and As shown in the preliminary plans, appropriately sized curve radii and turnaround areas have been provided to accommodate emergency and service vehicles. This criterion is met. c. Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways abutting and through a site if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan or terminate at the boundaries of the project site. There are no bike/pedestrian facilities shown on adopted plans or that terminate at boundaries of the subject site. This criterion does not apply. However, the connectivity standards in TDC 18.620.020 require bike/pedestrian connections at least every 330 feet in the Tigard Triangle. To meet the connectivity standard, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C1O0), the applicant proposes a public bike/pedestrian access easement and improvements through the site from SW 72°d Avenue to the Walmart site. 8. Landscaping and open space—Residential development. In addition to the buffering and screening requirements of paragraph 2 of this subsection D, and any minimal use open space facilities, a minimum of 20% of the site shall be landscaped. This may be accomplished in improved open space tracts, or with landscaping on individual lots provided the developer includes a landscape plan, prepared or approved by a licensed landscape architect, and surety for such landscape installation. The project is commercial for a medical office use.This criterion does not apply. 9. Public transit: a. Provisions for public transit may be required where the site abuts or is within a quarter mile of a public transit route. The required facilities shall be based on: i.The location of other transit facilities in the area; and ii. The size and type of the proposed development. PDR2016-00011/SDR-'016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 16 OF 40 b. The required facilities may include but are not necessarily limited to such facilities as: i.A waiting shelter; ii.A turn-out area for loading and unloading; and iii. Hard surface paths connecting the development to the waiting area. c. If provision of such public transit facilities on or near the site is not feasible, the developer may contribute to a fund for public transit improvements provided the Commission establishes a direct relationship and rough proportionality between the impact of the development and the requirement. The closest transit route is TriMet Bus Route 78, which runs through the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue at SW Beveland Street, which is ±0.2 miles away from the subject site. The closest bus stop is Stop ID 13736,which is ±0.3 miles away from the subject site. Transit facilities are not planned for the site. However, a hard surface pedestrian path is planned for the site to provide greater connectivity within the neighborhood, including to transit services. This criterion is met. 10. Parking: a. All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.765; As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the project is planned to comply with the off-street parking standards. Findings for Chapter 18.765 are included below. This criterion is met. 11. Drainage. All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.810. An applicant may propose an alternate means for stormwater conveyance on the basis that a reduction of stormwater runoff or an increase in the level of treatment will result from the use of such means as green streets,porous concrete, or eco roofs. As shown on the Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan (Sheet C200), the project is designed to comply with the drainage standards. Findings for Chapter 18.810 are included below.This criterion is met. 12. Floodplain dedication. Where landfill and/or development are allowed within or adjacent to the 100- year floodplain, the city shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. The project is not located within the 100-year floodplain. This criterion does not apply. 13. Shared open space facilities. These requirements are applicable to residential planned developments only. The detailed development plan shall designate a minimum of 20% of the gross site area as a shared open space facility. The open space facility may be comprised of any combination of the following: a. Minimal use facilities. Up to 75% of the open space requirement may be satisfied by reserving areas for minimal use. Typically these areas are designated around sensitive lands (steep slopes, wetlands, streams, or 100-year floodplain). b. Passive use facilities. Up to 100% of the open space requirement may be satisfied by providing a detailed development plan for improvements (including landscaping, irrigation, pathway and other structural improvements) for passive recreational use. c. Active use facilities. Up to 100% of the open space requirement may be satisfied by providing a detailed development plan for improvements (including landscaping, irrigation, pathway and other structural improvements) for active recreational use. d. The open space area shall be shown on the final plan and recorded on the final plat or covenants. The project is for a commercial medical office use. This criterion does not apply. 14. Open space conveyance: Where a proposed park, playground or other public use shown in a plan adopted by the city is located in whole or in part in a subdivision, the commission may require the PDR201640011/SDR20164"7-"TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 17 OF 40 dedication or reservation of such area within the subdivision, provided that the reservation or dedication is roughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park system. The project does not include open space conveyance. This criterion does not apply. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria have not all been met,but can be met with the following condition of approval. In addition, the Commission may require the applicant to provide an alternate site plan to demonstrate that the buildings and other site elements have been designed and located to preserve the existing topography to the greatest degree possible. CONDITION: The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that details the buffer and screening elements that meet the requirements in Tables 18.745.1 and 2 or that otherwise attain the same level of buffering and screening with alternate materials or methods. 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Uses: The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use.A wide range of uses,including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers,major event entertainment,and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. According to Table 18.520.1, the proposed Triangle Medical Office Building is a permitted use in the General Commercial zone. Development Standards: All development must comply with: All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.370. As shown in the applicant's narrative and plan set and the table below, the proposed Triangle Medical Office development meets the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district. However, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards supersede these standards where they conflict. As shown in the table below, a maximum front yard setback is additionally required by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. The proposed Building only partially meets the maximum front yard setback standard as described later in this report under the Tigard Triangle Design Standards section. TABLE 18.520.2 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS STANDARDS C-G TT Standards Proposed Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 358 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback 0 ft. (ITDS max 10 ft.) 10- 12 ft. Minimum Side Yard Setback 0 ft. 36/260 ft. Minimum Rear Yard Setback 0 ft. 400 ft. Maximum Building Height 45 ft. 30 ft. Maximum Site Coverage 85% 70.4% Minimum Landscaping 15% 29.6% All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. As shown in the findinLs in this staff report, not all other applicable standards and requirements have been met, but PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 18 OF 40 can be met with the conditions of approval recommended in this staff report. FINDING As shown in the analysis above, the proposed medical office use is a permitted use and the proposed Detailed Development Plan meets the applicable development standards contained in the underlying C- G General Commercial zoning district. However, not all other applicable standards in Title 18 are met by the applicant's proposal,but can be met with recommended conditions of approval in this Staff Report 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT 18.620.020 Street Connectivity Demonstration of standards. All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Section 18.370.010 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. A. Design option. 1. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. The distance between SW Dartmouth Street along the west side of SW 72"d Avenue to the next street, SW Hermoso Wa�,is approximately 930 feet,which exceeds the 660-foot maximum street spacing standard. On the east side of SW 72" Avenue, SW Elmhurst is approximately 560 feet from SW Dartmouth. Typical street design would extend SW Elmhurst across 72nd to the west to serve the parcels west of 72"d, including the subject parcel. However, there are extenuating circumstances that may preclude a through connection of SW Elmhurst to the west including limited site distance along 72nd Avenue where it crests the hill, and existing development to the west. The Concept Future Street Plan (Sheet C400) shows how this connection could be made consistent with the March 2015 Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan Street Network and Design Classification Preferred Option (non-regulatory). Since the subject site extends 400 feet south of SW Dartmouth, the extension of Elmhurst at 72"d Avenue is not required in connection with this application. However,given the site topography, the more feasible connection to the Wahnart site appears to cross a portion of the subject site toward the west in alignment with the Walmart parking lot drive aisle. To the extent the extension shown on the plans is feasible and is not precluded by the proposed development, this standard is met. 2. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more than 330 feet. As shown on the Concept Future Street Plan (Sheet C400), public bicycle and pedestrian connections within the project vicinity are located on SW 72nd Avenue, SW Dartmouth Street and SW Beveland Street. The block length along SW 72"d that includes the subject site between Dartmouth and Hermoso Way is 930 feet in length. Two pedestrian connections to the west along this block length should be expected with future development. As measured from Dartmouth, 330 feet is within the subject property frontage. The proposed pathway is located approximately 290 feet south of the north property line providing a new east/west pedestrian route from SW 72nd Avenue to the Walmart property to the west. The proposed 10-foot public access easement is shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100). However, the applicant's access easement with Walmart (Washington County 2010-100727) may preclude this connection where it connects with the Walmart property. A safe pedestrian through-connection to the Walmart site may require a revised easement agreement between Walmart and Base Camp extending the public access and improvements onto the Walmart site to ensure connectivity is achieved and safe to use. It is the city's position that the existing access easement over the Walmart site is broad enough to include a pedestrian route between the properties regardless of where that route originates. To ensure safe bike and pedestrian connectivity is achieved, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded 10-foot wide public bike/pedestrian access easement across the subject property from SW 72"d Avenue to the western property line with Walmart. The easement shall also include that portion of the Walmart site that is subject to the existing easement agreement to allow safe access to Walmart's existing pedestrian facilities,if permitted by Walmart. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007—TRIANGLF MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 19 OF 40 18.620.030 Site Design Standards Compliance.All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010.C.2, governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. A. Building placement on major and minor arterials. Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along major and minor arterial streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on major and minor arterial streets. See Diagram 1 for some examples of how this standard may be met. The planned medical office building will have frontage along SW 72nd Avenue, which is classified as an "Arterial" according to the Tigard Triangle Plan District and the City's Transportation System Plan.As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the proposed building will occupy approximately 165 feet of the 358-foot site frontage, or 46 percent. However,with 42 feet of frontage located within an adjusted vegetated corridor area, the property has just 316 feet of developable frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. Therefore, the proposed building will occupy 52 percent of the developable frontage. This standard is met. B. Building setback. The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be zero feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. As shown on Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the proposed medical office building uses buffer averaging along the vegetated corridor to the north, as allowed by Clean Water Services,with an effective setback of zero feet,which meets the standard. As shown on Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100) and the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al) Northeast View (B1) and Southeast View (D1), the proposed building has two planes to the eastern facade along 72nd Avenue. The southern 40 feet of the building and a parapet continuing the full length of the building are setback ten feet from SW 72nd Avenue. However, a 125-foot length of the building is recessed two feet from the parapet and setback 12 feet from the street. This area includes windows that are below the adjacent grade of the street and others that mass at the corner where the building is proudest above the street grade. The applicant states "the office building will comply with the building setback standards," but does not elaborate. For approximately 50 feet of the building length, the above-grade portion of the building facade would be setback ten feet from the right-of-way. For the next 110 feet an increasing portion of the fagade above grade would be setback 12 feet from the right-of-way. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted a revised site plan demonstrating the proposed building meets the maximum building setback along SW 72nd Avenue. This standard is met. C. Front yard setback design. Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to the applicable standard in paragraph 5 of this subsection A. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged.These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per 18.520.040.B and Table 18.520.2. The applicant did not address this standard. As shown on Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100) and the Color Building Elevations (Sheet A1) Northeast View (B1) and Southeast View (D1), the proposed building includes landscaping in planter boxes at the finish floor elevation (204 feet, from eight to 17 feet below street grade) within a graveled area ten to 12 feet wide at the base of the retaining wall. These features do not relate to the pedestrian path along SW 72nd Avenue. The proposed single-story building design does not include landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path at street level between the building and SW 72nd Avenue. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted a revised site plan showing landscaping, raised planters,with benches and/or other street furnishings along the length of the building between the building and the back of sidewalk along SW 72nd Avenue. This standard is met. D. Walkway connection to building entrances. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007—"TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 20 01;40 scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per 18.520.040.B and Table 18.520.2. The applicant did not address this standard. Because of the single-story building program, the walkway connection to the building entrance from SW 72nd Avenue has not been made directly. Instead, a path is provided south of the development site from the sidewalk of SW 72nd Avenue to the interior parking lot-facing entry to the building. As shown on Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the sidewalk is a six-foot wide asphalt path within a ten-foot public pedestrian access easement. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted a revised site plan showing a walkway at least six feet wide and paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials.This standard is met. E. Parking location and landscape design. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of- way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 landscape standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is eight feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to an L-2 landscape standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 landscape standard. See Diagram 2 below. As shown on Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), parking will be located on the sides and rear of the planned medical office building and will be limited to approximately 18 percent of the SW 72"d Avenue street frontage.As shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plans (Sheets 1,100-1,103), landscaped areas will meet the minimum depth but will also be grade-separated by a retaining wall 17 to 22 feet in height. Interior side and rear yards are shown to be landscaped to an L-2 landscape standard. Since the parking lot is grade-separated from the adjacent public street, the landscaping screen at the parking lot level would not contribute more than the retaining wall would to the screening of the parking lot from most views from SW 72nd Avenue. However, landscaping provided at back of sidewalk along SW 72nd Avenue would help screen the parking lot from views by pedestrians. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted revised site and landscape plans that show the L-1 landscaping standards are met at sidewalk level between the parking lot and SW 72nd Avenue. This standard is met 18.620.040 Building Design Standards A. Nonresidential buildings. All nonresidential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in 18.370.010.C.2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows. All street-facing elevations within the building setback (zero to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al) the building is planned to be located at a significantly lower grade than SW 72nd Avenue. Therefore, the ground floor windows located along the planned building's eastern fagade will not be visible from the street or sidewalk. Several large windows are planned along the northeast corner of the building,where the change in elevation is less substantial, and numerous large windows are planned along the planned building's northern facade,which is visible from SW Dartmouth Street. The application did contain scalable elevations or sufficient information to determine whether the standard is met. Assuming the building is 30 feet tall, it would be 13 feet above ground at the south end and 22 feet above ground at the north end. Most of the three to nine foot measurable window area above the adjacent sidewalk does not contain windows except for the tall windows at the northeast corner. Estimating that 180 square feet is available on the 72"d PDR201G-00011/SDR-2016-110007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 21 OF 40 Avenue facade and a like amount on the adjoining north elevation, 360 square feet is in windows, or approximately 36 percent. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted dimensioned elevations of the eastern fagade demonstrating that the minimum 50 percent ground floor window requirement is met. 2. Building facades. Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least one foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al), the building's eastern fagade is 165 feet in length and appears to feature a terra cotta metal wall panel and a champagne metal wall panel separated by a two-foot building off-set vertically at 40 feet from the south corner of the building and then running horizontally for approximately 125 feet, which defines the parapet. A window wall extends along the northern 30 feet of the facade. The standard requires a variation in features that extend along the width of the building at intervals of 50 feet or less. The central wall area extends without variation for approximately 95 feet. At the December 5, 2016 hearing, the applicant submitted dimensioned elevations of the eastern building fagade demonstrating the building facades standard is met. 3. Weather protection. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al), the building's primary entrance will feature a significant awning. A second awning is provided on the building's south east side where a limited access entry will provide access to bicycle parking, the trash enclosure, and other uses. The awning at the entrance will not be back lit. Due to differences in grade between the public sidewalk and the planned building,no weather protection is provided along the building's SW 72"d Avenue frontage. Since the standard does not require,but only encourages weather protection along building frontages,the standard is otherwise met. 4. Building materials. Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than two feet. As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al), building materials will not include any of the materials prohibited by this Section. The applicant states that the exposed formed concrete foundation wall surface voids will be filled, forming fins removed and"sacked" to provide a consistent texture suitable for painting. Shadow line reveals will be added along with a surface texture in preparation for painting. The wall will be painted to blend with the field brick. This standard is met. 5. Roofs and roof lines. Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al),the building will include architectural features such as parapets and blade walls that form and accent the roofline. This standard is met. 6. Roof-mounted equipment. All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-()0(17-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 22 OF 40 As shown on the Color Building Elevations (Sheet Al),roof-mounted equipment will be screened or set back to minimize exposure from SW 72"d Avenue. Since SW 72"d Avenue crests at 248 feet elevation and the building parapet is at 234 feet, southbound vehicles and pedestrians will look down on the roof during an approach from the south over approximately 400 feet. To ensure roof-mounted equipment is adequately screened from view, the applicant shall submit site line studies and design details of proposed screening for review and approval.As conditioned,this standard is met. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the development code the following standards shall be met: A Concept Signage Plan (Sheet C006)was submitted. However,any proposed sign will require a separate sign permit application and review for consistency with the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.780 and these standards,prior to placement of signs. 18.620.060 Entry Portals Required locations. Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle Plan District. The subject site is located adjacent to the Tigard Triangle Focal Point at SW 72"d and Dartmouth and not in the vicinity of any of entry portals.These standards do not apply. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle Plan District. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other subsections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. A. L-1 parking lot screen. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on public streets. The L-1 standard is in addition to other standards in other chapters of this title. The setback shall be a minimum of eight feet between the parking lot and public street. L-1 trees shall be considered parking lot trees and spaced between 30 and 40 feet on center within the setback. All L-1 trees shall be a minimum of 3-1/2 inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a three-foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. To ensure an effective parking lot screen, the applicant shall submit revised site and landscape plans that show the L-1 landscaping standards are met at sidewalk level along SW 72"d Avenue.As conditioned,this standard is met. B. L-2 general landscaping.The L-2 standard applies to all other trees and shrubs required by this chapter and Chapter 18.745 (except those required for L-1 parking lot screen). For trees and shrubs required by Chapter 18.745, the L-2 standard is an additional standard. L-2 trees that are also street trees, median trees, and trees required to frame entry portals shall be selected in conformance with Table 18.620.1 of this section. If conformance with Table 18.620.1 is precluded by physical constraints caused by public utilities or required public improvements, the director may approve alternative selections.All L-2 trees shall be a minimum of 2- 1/2-inch caliper at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. L-2 standards apply throughout the site.As shown in the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheet L100),this standard is met. 18.620.080 Street and Accessway Standards Tables and diagrams. The following tables and diagrams show street and pedestrian accessway standards for the Tigard Triangle Plan District. Landscape and street design details are also included in this section. The site is located on SW 72nd Avenue,which is included in Table 18.620.2. Along the property's frontage, SW 72nd Avenue is already a fully improved public street,including two striped travel lanes,a center turn lane,a right-turn lane onto SW Dartmouth Street,two bike lanes,curbs, storm drainage, street trees, concrete sidewalks,and street lighting. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-(X)007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 23 OF 40 These standards are met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, not all of the Tigard Triangle design standards are met, but can be met with the following conditions of approval. CONDITIONS: • The applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded 10-foot wide public bike/pedestrian access easement across the subject property from SW 72nd Avenue to the western property line with Walmart. The easement shall also include that portion of the Walmart site that is subject to the existing easement agreement to allow safe access to Walmart's existing pedestrian facilities, if permitted by Walmart. • The applicant shall submit site line studies and design details of proposed roof-mounted equipment screening for review and approval. 18.705 ACCESS, EGRESS,AND CIRCULATION 18.705.030 General Provisions A. Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real property in the city. An existing access easement provides access from the Walmart driveway onto SW Dartmouth Street. Pedestrian access is also provided from the SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real property in the city. B.Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. The applicant has provided preliminary detailed plans (Exhibit A), including a Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), that show how access, egress and circulation requirement are to be fulfilled. This requirement is met. C. joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title,provided: 1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and 2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the city. The applicant will share access through a joint access easement agreement with Walmart on the west side of the project, through the Walmart access south of Dartmouth. Satisfactory legal evidence is included in the application materials (Washington County 2010-100727) and is a part of the permanent land use record.This requirement is met. D. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in 18.705.030.H and I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the city for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. The proposed development site shares access to SW Dartmouth Street, a public street, through a joint access easement agreement with Walmart.This requirement is met. E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with 18.810.030.N. Public street frontage improvements were completed on SW 72nd Avenue by the city in conjunction with the 72nd and Dartmouth intersection construction. This requirement does not apply. F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: PDR2010-00011/SDR_201G-00007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 24 OF 4(1 1. Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100) walkways are planned from all ground-floor entrances through parking areas to the adjacent Walmart site and the SW 72nd Avenue public right-of-way. The site plan shows the bike/pedestrian easement terminating at the western property line, but does show improvements within the existing access easement area that would make the connection safe and convenient between the proposed development and the existing Walmart development. To ensure this requirement is met, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan to include convenient bike and pedestrian improvements within the required bike/pedestrian easement area including an extension of the six foot scored concrete path, curb cuts, crosswalk striping, and signage on the Walmart site, if permitted by Walmart. As conditioned,this standard is met. 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multifamily developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities. The proposed project is a commercial project.This standard does not apply. 3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum three-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. As shown in the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the proposed walkways within the site meet the walkway safety design guidelines. This standard is met. 4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, other pervious paving surfaces, etc. Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. As shown in the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the proposed walkways are paved with asphalt or graveled. Signing and lighting are not indicated in the plan set. To ensure the required walkways meet this standard, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows the walkway surface materials, lighting and signing are designed as needed for safety purposes. As conditioned, this requirement is met. G. Inadequate or hazardous access. These requirements are not applicable to the subject proposal. H.Access management. 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the city and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility). PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-(X W7-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 25 OF 40 A Transportation Impact Study, dated July 2,2016,was submitted by Lancaster Engineering. The applicant will share access through an easement on the west side of the project, through the Walmart access south of Dartmouth. In addition, a Technical Memorandum dated September 7, 2016 was submitted as an addendum to address the Haines St/65`''Avenue intersection concluding that no mitigation would be required. 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from city engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed driveway connects to the Walmart driveway approximately 180 feet south of the signalized intersection. This criterion is met. 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. 4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed driveway does not directly access Dartmouth, a collector. Access is provided by connection to the Walmart driveway at a signalized intersection. These criteria do not apply. J. Minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial use. 1. Vehicle access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.3 TABLE 18.705.3 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES Required Parking Minimum Number Minimum Access Minimum Pavement Spaces of Driveways Width 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required 2. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; 3.Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The proposed development includes 160 parking spaces. One access drive is provided to the existing Walmart access way out to SW Dartmouth. Therefore, a minimum 50-foot access width with 40 feet paved with curbs is required. Internal access drives come within 12 feet of the primary ground floor entrance. As shown in the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100) the commercial vehicle access/egress requirements are met. K One-way vehicular access points. Where a proposed parking facility indicates only one-way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. No one-way access is proposed. This standard does not apply. PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 26 OF 40 L. Director's authority to restrict access. The director has the authority to restrict access when the need to do so is dictated by one or more of the following conditions: 1. To provide for increased traffic movement on congested streets and to eliminate turning movement problems, the director may restrict the location of driveways on streets and require the location of driveways be placed on adjacent streets, upon the finding that the proposed access would: a. Cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or b. Provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles;or c. Cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the public health,safety, and general welfare. 2. To eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial or industrial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. The Director shall require access easements between properties where necessary to provide for parking area connections; 3. To facilitate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, access and parking area plans shall provide efficient sidewalk and/or pathway connections, as feasible,between neighboring developments or land uses; 4. A decision by the director per paragraphs 1-3 of this subsection L may be appealed by means of a Type II procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using criteria contained in Section 18.370.020.C.3. To eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. To ensure this requirement is met, the applicant shall provide an access/egress easement for future parking area connections to the property to the south of the subject property. As conditioned,this requirement is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, not all of the access/egress standards are met, but with the following conditions of approval can be met. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall submit a revised site plan to include convenient bike and pedestrian improvements within the required bike/pedestrian easement area including an extension of the six foot scored concrete path,curb cuts,crosswalk striping, and signage on the Walmart site,if permitted by Walmart. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows the walkway surface materials, lighting and signing are designed as needed for safety purposes. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that provides the ability of the property to the southwest to connect via parking lot access and provide a recorded access/egress easement for future parking area crossover connections. Adjacent property owners must independently obtain access rights over Walmart's property. 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 18.745.040 Street Tree Standards A. Street trees shall be required as part of the approval process for conditional use (Type III), downtown design review (Type II and III), minor land partition (Type II), planned development (Type III), site development review (Type II) and subdivision (Type II and III)permits. Public street frontage improvements, including street trees, were completed on SW 72nd Avenue by the City in conjunction with the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth intersection construction project. This requirement does not apply. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening A. General provisions. 1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site,without unduly interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of pedestrians and vehicles. PDR2016-"l1/SDR2016-(K 07—'TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 27 OF 40 2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering,but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix. 3. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be submitted for the director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this code. B. Buffering_and screening requirements. 1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses. 2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, accessways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffer area except where an accessway has been approved by the city. 3.A fence, hedge or wall, or any combination of such elements,which are located in any yard is subject to the conditions and requirements of paragraph B.8 and subsection D of this section. 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. D-Level buffering is required along the southern property line. As conditioned above in the detailed planned development section of this report, this standard is met. E. Screening: sl2ecial provisions. 1. Screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas: a. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. In no cases shall nonconforming screening of parking and loading areas (i.e., nonconforming situation) be permitted to become any less conforming. Nonconforming screening of parking and loading areas shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this chapter as part of the approval process for conditional use (Type III), downtown design review (Type II and III), planned development (Type III), and site development review (Type II) permits only. The specifications for this screening are as follows: i. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls and raised planters; ii. Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking areas from the public right-of-way; iii. Materials to be installed should achieve a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees; iv. All parking areas, including parking spaces and aisles, shall be required to achieve at least 30% tree canopy cover at maturity directly above the parking area in accordance with the parking lot tree canopy standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. As shown in the Preliminary Landscape Plans (Sheets L100-1003), landscaping is provided around the proposed parking lot and 53 percent parking lot tree canopy is provided.These standards are met. 2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height.All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area. As shown on the Building Shell Plan (Sheet A2), the refuse area will be enclosed and screened with a masonry brick wall. The applicant states that "any other service facilities or equipment will be appropriately screened if visible from the public right-of-way." The standard requires screening of service facilities that would also be visible from customer parking and residential areas. PDR2016-"l1/SDR2016-(XKK)7-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 28 OF 40 To ensure this standard is met,the applicant shall submit detailed plans of any service facilities demonstrating that they are screened from view. As conditioned, this standard is met. F. Buffer matrix. 1. The buffer matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used in calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between proposed uses and abutting uses or zoning districts. Adjacent uses to the subject property include a similar use (retail commercial) to the west,undeveloped wetland area to the north, SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way to the east, and single-family residential uses to the south. Table 18.745.1 requires a D-level Buffer between a single family residence and parking lots in excess of 50 spaces. In this case, due to intervening topography, the western portion of the proposed parking lot would be visible from the existing dwelling located approximately 100 feet up-slope. The applicant states that"The project complies with Option 2 with a 6-foot tall fence and shrubs within a 15-foot wide buffer. However, as shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheet L100), buffering and screening of the planned parking area includes trees and ground cover, but no shrubs and the fence height and material is not called out on the plan. Further analysis is necessary to determine whether the proposed buffering and screening is adequate. In addition, vehicle circulation will be required between the subject site and the adjacent site to the south when redeveloped,which should inform the design of the D-level buffer screening. As conditioned,above, this standard is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, not all of the landscaping standards are met, but can be met with the following conditions of approval. CONDITION: The applicant shall submit detailed plans of any service facilities demonstrating that they are screened from view. 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE 18.755.010 Purpose and Applicability A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that certain new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source-separated recyclable materials prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. B. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and nonresidential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. The storage standards apply to the proposed commercial development.As shown in the Building Shell Plan (Sheet A2) the applicant demonstrates compliance with the Location,Design and Access Standards of this Chapter. F. Franchised hauler review method. 1. Applicability. The franchised hauler review method is only available in jurisdictions with franchise collection service areas because there is certainty as to which hauler will actually provide service to the proposed development, once it is constructed; 2. Description of method. This method provides for coordinated review of the proposed site plan by the franchised hauler serving the subject property; A service provider letter from Pride Disposal is required to demonstrate that the proposed storage facility can be accessed and serviced as shown in the application materials. The application did not include a Pride SPL. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the applicant shall provide a Pride Disposal service provider letter to demonstrate the proposed storage facility can be accessed and serviced as shown on Sheet A2. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, not all of the applicable Mined Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage standards are met,but with the following condition of approval can be met. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a Pride Disposal service provider letter to demonstrate the proposed PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-INKI07-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 29 OF 40 storage facility can be accessed and serviced as shown on Sheet A2. 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS 18.765.030 General Provisions A. Vehicle parking plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. The applicant's submittal included a Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100),which is scaled and shows proposed on-site parking, access, egress, and circulation. This provision is met. G. Disabled-accessible parking. All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the state building code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), six disabled parking spaces are provided located close to the primary building entrance. Specific design requirements for disabled parking will be reviewed by the Building Division during building plans review.This provision is met. 18.765.040 General Design Standards A. Maintenance of parking areas.All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all times. Breaks in paved surfaces shall be repaired promptly and broken or splintered wheel stops shall be replaced so that their function will not be impaired. This is the ongoing obligation of the applicant. B.Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.705, Access,Egress and Circulation; 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; 4.Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795,Visual Clearance; 5.Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt, concrete, or pervious paving surface.Any pervious paving surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained; and As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100),the access drives meet the applicable standards. F. Pedestrian access. Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the pedestrian access meets the provisions of 18.705.030.F, as reviewed above. G. Parking lot landscaping. Parking lots shall be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.745. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the parking lot is landscaped with planting beds, parking lot trees, and screening vegetation as required in Chapter 18.745. These requirements are met. I. Parking lot striping. 1. Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-W)07-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAG{ 30 OH 40 2. All interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), all parking spaces are clearly marked and compact spaces are named. Further flow direction marking and signage for pedestrian safety may be necessary. J. Wheel stops. Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), each parking space includes a wheel stop located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This requirement is met. K. Drainage. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with specifications approved by the city engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur except for single-family and duplex residences, off-street parking and loading facilities shall be drained to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks. As shown on the Preliminary Drainage Plan (Sheet C200), the parking areas are drained to avoid ponding. This requirement is met. L. Lighting. A lights providing to illuminate any public or private parking area or vehicle sales area shall be arranged to direct the light away from any adjacent residential district. As show on the Lighting Site Plans (Sheets E010 and E011), the parking areas are illuminated with 4000K led down- lights on 20-foot poles with an average luminance of 1.71 and decreasing luminance toward the southern property line adjacent to exiting residential development.This standard is met. M. Signs. Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. No signs have been proposed within the parking lot. If signs are proposed, they will require review under Chapter 18.780. N. Space and aisle dimensions. (Figure 18.765.1) As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), the space and aisle dimension meet the standards in Figure 18.765.1. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles,landscape areas or pedestrian ways; 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; 4. Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. B. Covered parking spaces. 1.When possible,bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: PDR2016-00011/SDR201Cr00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 31 OF 40 1. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground,wall or other structure; 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least two and one-half feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; 5. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased.At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; 6.Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. D. Paving. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete, other pervious paving surfaces, or similar material. This surface must be designed and maintained to remain well-drained. E. Minimum bicycle parking requirements. The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.768.2 in 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Single-family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), 14 bike parking spaces are required (0.40/1000 x 36) and 14 covered bike parking spaces are shown within 50 feet of the building's main entrance consistent with the bike parking design,location and access standards. These standards are met. 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements According to Table 18.765.2, the medical office use requires a minimum of 140 spaces (3.9/1000 x 36) and permits a maximum of 176 spaces (4.9/1000 x 36); 160 spaces proposed. This requirement is met. 18.765.080 Off-Street Loading Requirements A. Off-street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: 1.A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; 2.A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. As shown on the Preliminary Site Plan (SheetC100), one 12-foot by 23-foot loading space is provided at the west end of the building. This requirement is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above,the applicable Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements are met. 18.790 URBAN FORESTRY PLAN Urban Forestry Plan Requirements A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; 2. Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual (UFM); 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. FINDING: A certified arborist, Bruce Baldwin with AKS Engineering has prepared an Urban Forestry Plan including the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan (Sheet C030), the Preliminary Tree Canopy Plan (Sheets 1,102-1,103), and a supplemental arborist report date June 30, 2016, in which Mr. Baldwin attests to meeting the applicable Urban Forestry Manual standards. This criterion is met. 18.790.060 Urban Forestry Plan Implementation B. Tree Establishment. The establishment of all trees shown to be planted in the tree canopy site plan PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 32 OF 40 (per 18.790.030 A.3) and supplemental report (per 18.790.030.A.4) of the previously approved urban forestry plan shall be guaranteed and required according to the tree establishment requirements in Section 11,part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. A condition of approval is added for the applicant to provide a tree establishment bond that meets the requirements of the Urban Forestry Manual Section 11, Part 2. The plan includes 55 new trees. Therefore, a bond in the amount of$25,300 (55 planted trees x $460/tree) is required.As conditioned, this requirement is met. C. Urban forest inventory. Spatial and species specific data shall be collected according to the urban forestry inventory requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual for each open grown tree and area of stand grown trees in the tree canopy site plan (per Section 18.790.030.A.3) and supplemental report (per Section 18.790.030.A.4) of a previously approved urban forestry plan. Section 11, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual states that prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall provide a fee to cover the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan. The plan includes 55 planted trees and three retained trees. Therefore, a fee in the amount of$1,750 ($154 first tree + $1,596 ($28 x 57 additional trees) is required. As conditioned, this requirement is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the applicable urban forestry plan implementation standards are met. To ensure these standards are implemented, the following conditions of approval are required. CONDITIONS: • Prior to any site work, the project arborist shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. • The project arborist shall perform semimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance/non-compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the project planner within one week of the site inspection. • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a fee for the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan of 55 planted trees in the amount of$1,750 ($154 first tree + $1,596 ($28 x 57 additional trees). • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a tree establishment bond in the amount of$25,300 (55 planted trees x $460/tree). 18.795 VISUAL CLEARANCE Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. FINDING: The applicant refers to the Preliminary Site Plan (Sheet C100), and concludes "the project's site design prevents any obstructions or visual clearance issues at the planned driveway intersection or within the parking area." However, visual clearance areas have not been shown on the plans. The plan shows potential conflicts with retaining walls and the Landscaping Plan does not show features on the Walmart property where the driveway connects. To ensure visual clearance areas are PDR20164Ml l/SDR201G-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 33 OF 40 maintained, a condition of approval shall require visual clearance areas be shown on the site plan. CONDITION: The applicant shall submit a revised site plan showing visual clearance areas at proposed intersections. SECTION 18.810: STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. This project abuts SW 72nd and Dartmouth, both sides of which have recently been improved to meet current TDC Standards Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. No new streets are proposed as part of this application. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: This project abuts 72nd Avenue, which has been fully improved to its ultimate width. The project will access SW Dartmouth Street, with a shared access with Walmart, which has been improved to its ultimate width. No new public street improvements will be required. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. In early meetings with the city, the applicant was asked to show how Elmhurst Street could be extended through the subject site. However, the Elmhurst Street and 72nd Avenue intersection does not line up with this property's frontage. The street alignment would have to be manipulated to line up with the intersection, cross the applicant's site and then connect to the access easement on Walmart's site. Walmart has only granted access rights to the subject property, not to any other property or public street access. The applicant has prepared a future street plan that shows Elmhurst Street aligned with the existing intersection. The street then runs in the westerly direction, towards Walmart at approximately 15 percent grade. The street right-of-way would run through at least two of the three parcels south of the subject site. When development of any of the three parcels south of the subject site occurs the future street will have to be addressed. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that 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 a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. PDR2016 0011/SDR2016-00007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 34 OF 40 The extension of Elmhurst Street is not required with this application, as Elmhurst Street does not line up with this property's frontage. The proposed development does not preclude future development of Elmhurst Street. A future applicant can also provide plans with a street alignment or connections through adjacent parking lots. The applicant's plans shall provide the ability of the property to the southwest to connect via parking lot access and cross over easements. This access cannot be activated until there is a modified access agreement with the Walmart property management team. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that 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 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. The extension of Elmhurst Street is not proposed with this application because the project site does not align horizontally with the existing Elmhurst Street and 72"d Avenue intersection. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that 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. No streets are proposed or required with the proposed development. However, extension of SW Elmhurst to the west of SW 72"d Avenue may occur with development of adjacent parcels to the south of the subject parcel at which time these issues will be addressed. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. Not applicable to the subject application. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of- ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. 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. The applicant proposes a pedestrian path through the site, which meets this standard and is addressed in detail in the Tigard Triangle Connectivity section, above. This standard is met. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The site has frontage on SW 72"d Avenue, which was recently improved to its ultimate street section, including sidewalks on both sides of the Arterial. These improvements extend beyond the property frontage in each direction. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water PDR201(r(XK)11/SDR2016-00007—'1RIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 35 OF 40 Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. The proposed development will connect to an existing public sanitary sewer located on the adjacent site to the west. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. NA Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). City design standards mandate that developments shall extend utilities to any unserved parcels. The applicant shall provide a storm drain connection that is sized to convey runoff from upstream parcels through the proposed development site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25- year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant has proposed an underground detention system. Water quality treatment will be provided by a storm filter manhole. A final stormwater report shall be submitted for review and approval. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets;and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. PDR2011x00011/SDR201600007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 36 OF 40 Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities along the project frontage. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: A Transportation Impact Study has been prepared by Lancaster Engineering, dated July 2, 2016. The report addresses site trips, operational analysis, safety analysis, future street plan and sight distance. From the executive summary the study concludes the following: • The proposed development is projected to generate 86 site trips during the morning peak hour and 129 site trips during the evening peak hour. • Based on the results of the operational analysis the intersection of SW Haines Street at SW 65`'' Avenue is currently failing; however, the intersection is within the City of Portland. Interim mitigation measures to improve operation would be to restripe the northbound approach. • All other study intersections are currently operating acceptably per City of Tigard and ODOT standards. • Based on the most recent five years of crash date, no significant safety hazards were identified at any of the study intersections and no mitigation is recommended. • The proposed development does not preclude establishing an efficient future street system, including the western extension of SW Elmhurst Street. • Lancaster Engineers submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum #1, dated September 7, 2016. The focus of the addendum is on the existing and future operation of the SW Haines Street at SW 65h Avenue intersection with respect to capacity and level-of-service (LOS) and impacts from the proposed development. Based on the results of the delay study and the calibrated capacity and LOS analysis, the intersection of SW Haines at SW 65`I' Avenue is projected to operate acceptably through year 2018 either with or without the addition of site trips from the proposed development. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary or recommended at the intersection. • ODOT commented that the OR-217/SW 72nd Ave Westbound off-ramp intersection needs to adhere to the 0.85 V/C standard per the OHP. The development is increasing the V/C from 0.85 to 0.87 and therefore ODOT would like to see a queuing analysis done for this off-ramp in order to assess its impacts to OR-217. The analysis (Lancaster, dated September 7, 2016) was subsequently provided by the applicant, satisfying ODOT's request. Fire and Life Safety: A six-inch fire line was previously installed to serve this parcel. The applicant shall obtain approval for hydrant placement from Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue ('IVF&R). Public Water System: Water service in this area is provided by Tualatin Valley Water District ('I'VWD). The applicant shall obtain a Service Provider Letter from TVWD Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. PDR201(-00011/SDR201(-00007-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 37 OF 40 Prior to issuance of permits, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The proposed unit from Contech is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Contech, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Applicant has proposed private water quality facilities. Applicant shall enter into agreements of maintenance on city forms. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. The current 120OC-N shall be modified and a Strom Water Connection Authorization shall be obtained prior to any onsite utility work. GeoDesign, Inc. submitted a Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services, dated March 2, 2016. The purpose of the scope of work was to explore site subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design and construction of the proposed development. Based on the results of the subsurface explorations and engineering analyses,it is the opinion of the consultant that the site can be developed as proposed. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of this report into their construction plans. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer,storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit is separate from grading permit that is already issued. Site permit will be required. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard. An addressing fee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permit. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a"1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a"2",etc. The developer will also be required to provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. This will assist emergency services personnel to more easily find a particular home. PDR2016-00011 JSDR2016-0(M7-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 39 OF 40 SECTION VII, OTHER STAFF CQMMENTS The City of Tigard Development Review Engineer (Contact Kim McMillan, 503-718-2642) has reviewed the proposal and provided findings and recommended conditions of approval in a Memorandum dated October 31, 2016,which have been incorporated into the body of this staff report and included as an attachment. The City of Tigard Public Works Department (Contact John Goodrich, 503-718-2609) reviewed the proposal and provided comment addressed in the findings for the utilities section of this report. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Transportation (Seth Brumley, 503-731-8234) has reviewed the proposal and provided a comment letter dated September 9, 2016 which took issue with the applicant's analysis of three intersections including Haines/65d' Ave, OR-217/SW 7Td Ave Westbound off-ramp, and OR-99W/SW Dartmouth St. The applicant submitted a Technical Memorandum from Lancaster Engineering dated September 7, 2016 that found that the Haines/65'h Ave intersection would perform adequately and not require mitigation. The City Engineer determined that the turn lane change to the OR-99W/SW Dartmouth Street intersection would not be the responsibility of the applicant, in this case, but that a condition would be imposed on the applicant to address the queuing analysis at the OR-217/SW 72nd Ave Westbound off-ramp. Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and issued a Service Provider Letter (CWS File No. 16-001563) dated June 8, 2016 which describes on and off-site sensitive areas, encroachment into the vegetated corridor and mitigation requirements. CWS also submitted a stormwater connection permit review letter dated September 13, 2016 with conditions of approval. The letter notes that the site must complete the annexation process for inclusion into the CWS jurisdictional boundary in order for public sanitary or storm sewer services to be provided. A condition approval of this staff report will ensure compliance with CWS regulations. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Qohn Wolfe, 503-259-1504) has reviewed the proposal and submitted a comment letter dated October 10, 2016 with conditions of approval with respect to access, water supply, hydrant placement, and building access. A condition of approval of this staff report will implement the conditions of the TVF&R letter. SECTION IX. CONCLUSION Based on the foregQig y findings gs and an i , the City of Tigard Planning Commission has APPROVED Tignd Triangle Medical Office PDR2016-00011 and SDR2016-00007 PASSED: THE 5`s DAY OF DECEMBER,2016 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE APPLICANT AND ALL PARTIES TO THESE PROCEEDINGS BE NOTIFIED OF THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER CALISTA FITZGERALD-Planning Commission President Dated this r__ 16. /04d�- di dA-y- _Q PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007—TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 39 OF 40 Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Concept Plan 3. Detailed Plan 4. City of Tigard Engineering Memorandum dated October 31,2016 5. Clean Water Services Memorandum dated June 8,2016 6. TVF&R Letter dated October 10,2016 PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-M)07-TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PD PAGE 40 OF 40 7275 _ 11860 1 7140 !L7110 • 4 - ` - f 711 �►`i '. VICINITY MAP _-:.•: .� -ISPDR2016-00011 SDR2016-00007 �r I t9 31� -1 � - Triangle Medical Office y M z; 16945 945-x1+1 !s 'PBuilding 'j t1 4"1 r - - 11945 11945 • ' vet t Ir i 11945 ;A1945 rM0 1 4F 1 i9§�� „ 1i9rs — u 1 FY S T .¢ v'' — . - 11945,7119 5 1945 • ,%• r �ss' +w 75 -......`... h X5007500 75007500 1 i Subject Site 5111 7.5007500 -.___ •' - 136 12025 I , { 7142 ? ;__L2 021M 7AWN 168 L 1 'k In r, �,1D5 U5 o*ffl t. —654 ELiMHUR1T,, 713 100 7070 Approx.Scale 1:2,000-1 In=167 n rr Map printed at 07:33 AM on 01 Sep-16 -P -`+v _.. Imonn.hoo on ms me ro, 'i► '- �- _ ti a Devebl>• m Sery ces�Div shouts be venfietl with = 12280 • DATAIS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES.THE CITY OF TIGARD MAKES NO WARRANTY,REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE CONTENT,ACCURACY,TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF r. THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO 111 LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS OMISSIONS OR INACCURACIES IN THE 7-355 e �� �'1 3 j NFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED 4 7 315 ,wl .5 City of Tigard `w ,� •0 D 13125 SW Hall Blvd Feet h?�S.C! '� e " = #J ' i TI�gR qP5 Tigard,OR 97223 0 � �� ^• r 32 33 238 M 503 igard- r. • www.tigard-or.gov SW Dartmouth street r" WETLAND BUFFER r i CLINICAL � TWTUEUT « TREATMENT L � ENTRY C •� VEHICLE PARKING-CIRCULATION PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION PROPER�INE "�all LANDSCAPING i r� f[ I i CL ... ' » C002-CONCEPT SITE PLAN j • DE&VN- s1w ar.■Y ./ \ H1.10I v2m HL1D -77 �" Etr■ F v 3r %rF¢TA1FD cam 'r � _' rr2lneARm o2di ' -IrI- 0 _ J mmury Ir Z IMN O AI \\ 9T*G[TAm)NCWRA / 4£l/2aYAOE SHEER I . 0,E FAYl wl I - rt w No.w mm2. W J UM 3 K MT Cllwl t0 BE—m W m LS�■�/ kyr w 2Y ■'--- ----■'—'r' r tr—+f� am=00■or.) rr Gril�f■'r WJ9FOgGYFIFAM�.- U. LL o o o r v O a --------- ---- -_a ------ i � mw MWIIXE(TV) ro A a I T aAM rwlc�sr �X AT wa mssLU 2■, i LU r111ra sous OO 2■LICE rAara S■F■rs S W rI MY�I I�E — O N 9a8 roto Q N auw uVc fd¢ T V 9 OMIT J %��\ aoe �0000 t-177 m 7—ul— w ( R■m—y vo � fr m ®moo® N �_ \ T i \ o lo —mET�vwLL" cc ■ fumespx.) I RBAUW it LA a s■■Ya alax aw o I` 1'r'11_ --'/ FLU tY Slc ('A.) . _ �A 'i ---------------- v ' u■IMC CLVI LrY ERIC MM ' FASO am w VNasl aRl , iA■ C CAD RACK VYR m GNs1 V■Eg1C , _ PARKING PROVIDED OW w FBU 121 STANDARO 33 COMPACT(21%) ————.,—— PIER VAULTS 1' 6 AOA ". wm,.V211.01• — -- _ 160 TOTALr— joe - © -- 4762 SHEET C100 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: 10/31/2016 TO: Gary Pagenstecher FROM: Kim McMillan, Development Review Engineer RE: PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical Office SDR2016-00007 Access Management Section 18.705.030.H Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. A Transportation Impact Study, dated July 2, 2016, was submitted by Lancaster Engineering. The applicant will share access through an easement on the west side of the project, through the Wal-Mart access south of Dartmouth. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed driveway connects to the Walmart driveway approximately 180 feet south of the signalized intersection. This criterion is met. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 1 The proposed driveway does not directly access Dartmouth, a collector. Access is provided by connection to the Walmart driveway at a signalized intersection. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. This project abuts SW 72nd and Dartmouth, both sides of which have recently been improved to meet current TDC Standards Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. No new streets are proposed as part of this application. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: This project abuts 72nd Avenue, which has been fully improved to its ultimate width. The project will access SW Dartmouth Street, with a shared access with Wal-Mart, which has been improved to its ultimate width. No new public street improvements will be required. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 2 In early meetings with the city, the applicant was asked to show how Elmhurst Street could be extended through the subject site. However, the Elmhurst Street and 72nd Avenue intersection does not line up with this property's frontage. The street alignment would have to be manipulated to line up with the intersection, cross the applicant's site and then connect to the access easement on Walmart's site. Walmart has only granted access rights to the subject property, not to any other property or public street access. The applicant has prepared a future street plan that shows Elmhurst Street aligned with the existing intersection. The street then runs in the westerly direction, towards Walmart at approximately 15% grade. The street right-of-way would run through at least two of the three parcels south of the subject site. When development of any of the three parcels south of the subject site occurs the future street will have to be addressed. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that 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 a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. The extension of Elmhurst Street is not required with this application, as Elmhurst Street does not line up with this property's frontage. The proposed development does not preclude future development of Elmhurst Street. A future applicant can also provide plans with a street alignment or connections through adjacent parking lots. The applicant's plans shall provide the ability of the property to the southwest to connect via parking lot access and cross over easements. This access cannot be activated until there is a modified access agreement with the Walmart property management team. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that 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 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 PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 3 a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The extension of Elmhurst Street is not proposed with this application because the project site does not align horizontally with the existing Elmhurst Street and 72nd Avenue intersection. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.L states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured from the centerline intersection point of the two streets to the radius point of the bulb, and • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City. No Cul-de-sac is proposed. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. No public street is proposed. Access to Arterials and Major Collectors: Section 18.810.030.Q states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic, or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector; • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a non-access reservation along the arterial or major collector; or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 4 • If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. The subject property is not zoned residential, therefore, these criteria do not apply. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.T states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments. There are no private streets proposed. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that 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. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of- way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. PLANNING Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. 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. PLANNING PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 5 Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. PLANNING Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. PLANNING Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The site has frontage on SW 72d Avenue, which was recently improved to its ultimate street section, including sidewalks on both sides of the Arterial. These improvements extend beyond the property frontage in each direction. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. The proposed development will connect to an existing public sanitary sewer located on the adjacent site to the west. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. NA PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 6 Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). City design standards mandate that developments shall extend utilities to any unserved parcels. The applicant shall provide a storm drain connection that is sized to convey runoff from upstream parcels through the proposed development site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant has proposed an underground detention system. Water quality treatment will be provided by a storm filter manhole. A final stormwater report shall be submitted for review and approval. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 7 Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under- grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under- grounding. There are no overhead utilities along the project frontage. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: A Transportation Impact Study has been prepared by Lancaster Engineering, dated July 2, 2016. The report addresses site trips, operational analysis, safety PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 8 analysis, future street plan and sight distance. From the executive summary the study concludes the following: • The proposed development is projected to generate 86 site trips during the morning peak hour and 129 site trips during the evening peak hour. • Based on the results of the operational analysis the intersection of SW Haines Street at SW 65th Avenue is currently failing; however, the intersection is within the City of Portland. Interim mitigation measures to improve operation would be to restripe the northbound approach. • All other study intersections are currently operating acceptably per City of Tigard and ODOT standards. • Based on the most recent five years of crash date, no significant safety hazards were identified at any of the study intersections and no mitigation is recommended. • The proposed development does not preclude establishing an efficient future street system, including the western extension of SW Elmhurst Street, Lancaster Engineers submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum #1, dated September 7, 2016. The focus of the addendum is on the existing and future operation of the SW Haines Street at SW 65th Avenue intersection with respect to capacity and level-of-service (LOS) and impacts from the proposed development. Based on the results of the delay study and the calibrated capacity and LOS analysis, the intersection of SW Haines at SW 65th Avenue is projected to operate acceptably through year 2018 either with or without the addition of site trips from the proposed development. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary or recommended at the intersection. Fire and Life Safety: A 6" fire line was previously installed to serve this parcel. The applicant shall obtain approval for hydrant placement from TVFR (Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue). Public Water System: Water service in this area is provided by Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD). Applicant shall obtain Service Provider Letter from TVWD Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 9 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of permits, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The proposed unit from Contech is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Contech, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Applicant has proposed private water quality facilities. Applicant shall enter into agreements of maintenance on city forms. Gradinq and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. The current 120OC-N shall be modified and a Strom Water Connection Authorization shall be obtained prior to any onsite utility work. GeoDesign, Inc. submitted a Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services, dated March 2, 2016. The purpose of the scope of work was to explore site subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design and construction of the proposed development. Based on the results of the subsurface explorations and engineering analyses, it is the opinion of the consultant that the site can be developed as proposed. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of this report into their construction plans. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 10 Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit is separate from grading permit that is already issued. Site permit will be required. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard. An addressing fee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permit. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a 1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. The developer will also be required to provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. This will assist emergency services personnel to more easily find a particular home. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING THE SITE UTILITIES PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 503-718-2642) for review and approval: i. Prior to commencing site improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover all infrastructure work, storm water treatment facilities and any other work in the public right-of-way or work to public facilities. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 11 submitted for review to the Engineering Division. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tigard-or.gov). 2. Prior to commencing site improvements, submittal of the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Division will delay processing of project documents. 3. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Jonny Gish, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Jonny Gish, Engineering, 503-718- 2467). 4. The Applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on any adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 5. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant's plans shall provide the ability of the property to the southwest to connect via parking lot access and cross over easements, which will be activated only with an approved modified access agreement with Walmart. 6. Prior to PFI, Applicant's plans shall show provision for stormwater runoff from upstream parcels to the south. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 12 7. Prior to commencing site improvements, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and storm water quality details shall be provided to the city for review and approval as part of the PFI permit plans. 8. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 9. Prior to commencing site improvements, a 1200-CN permit is required. 10. Prior to commencing site improvements, a final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. 11. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations from the submitted geotechnical report by GeoDesign, dated March 2, 2016, into the final grading plan. The geotechnical engineer shall be employed by the applicant throughout the entire construction period to ensure that all grading, including cuts and fills, are constructed in accordance with the approved plan and Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy permit. 12. Prior to commencing site improvements, the Applicant shall submit final design plans and calculations for the on-site storm water facilities, including any improvements/replacement needed to the existing plantings in the water quality facility. The plans must be reviewed and approved before issuance of a site permit. 13. Prior to commencing site improvements, the Applicant shall obtain a (CWS) Storm water Connection Authorization prior to issuance of the City of Tigard PFI permit. Plans shall be submitted to the City of Tigard for review. The city will forward plans to CWS after preliminary review. 14. Prior to commencing site improvements, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for all public water line improvements. Any extension of public water lines or work in a right-of-way shall be shown on the proposed Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit construction plans. 15. Prior to commencing site improvements, the applicant will be required to provide written approval from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue for fire flow, PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 13 hydrant placement and access prior to issuance of the City of Tigard's site permit. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 503-718-2642) for review and approval: 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit, submit the number of suites to be addressed and pay the addressing fee. (Oscar Contreras, 503-718-2687). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 503-718-2642) for review and approval: 1-. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 18. A joint use and maintenance agreement shall be executed and recorded on City standard forms for all common driveways. The agreement shall be referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel Deeds. The agreement shall be approved by the Engineering Department prior to recording. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit as-built drawings tied to the GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). As-built submittal shall include an Acrobat (***.pdf) file, one 11x17 paper copy and the electronic point file as state above and shown in the example below. Excel spreadsheet/point database file example.- "Feature"; xample:"Feature"; "Type''; "XCOORD"; "YCOORD"; "ZCOORD": "SSMH02"; "MH"; "7456892.234"; "6298769.879"; "192.45" PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 14 "WV03", "WV", "7456956.654", "6298723.587", "214.05 20. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into an agreement on City forms for the maintenance of any on-site water quality facilities that will ensure compliance with the requirements of the manufacture. Submit a maintenance plan as required by CWS Design Standards for other types of facilities. 21. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Contech, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 22. Applicant shall comply with CWS requirements, as specified in the Service Provider Letter. This includes providing all onsite vegetated corridor planting, any offsite mitigation and maintenance of these facilities for a minimum two-year period. 23. Applicant shall assure for two-years, bond or cash, the maintenance of the private water quality facilities and vegetated corridor. PDR2016-00011 Triangle Medical PAGE 15 CleanWater Services Our commitment is clear. CWS File Number Service Provider Letter 16-001563 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 07-20). Jurisdiction: Tigard Review Type: Tier 2 Analysis Site Address 12105 SW 72nd AVE SPL Issue Date: June 08,2016 Location: Tigard, OR 97223 SPL Expiration Date: June 08,2018 Applicant Information: Owner Information: Name Name JUSTIN STANDLEY Company BASE CAMP 1, LLC Company CLACKAMAS Address 1399 FRANKLIN BLVD Address SUITE 100 EUGENE, OR 97403 Phone/Fax Phone/Fax (503) 563-6151 E-mail: E-mail: aks@aks-eng.com Tax lot ID Development Activity 2S101BA00402, 2S101BA00300, 2S101BA00400 Triangle Medical Office Building Pre-Development Site Conditions: Post Development Site Conditions: Sensitive Area Present: AI On-Site F Off-Site Sensitive Area Present: IX-1 On-Site R Off-Site Vegetated Corridor Width: 50 Vegetated Corridor Width: Variable Vegetated Corridor Condition: Degraded Enhancement of Remaining Vegetated Corridor Required: FRI Square Footage to be enhanced: 14,375 Encroachments into Pre-Development Vegetated Corridor: Type and location of Encroachment: Square Footage: Building and parking (Permanent Encroachment; Mitigation Required) 5,227 Construction access(Temporary Encroachment; Mitigation/Planting-in-place) 2,178 Mitigation Requirements: Type/Location Sq. Ft./Ratio/Cost On-site/2S101 BA00300 1,74311:1 Off-site/1 N206CB04000(A separate easement for the VC mitigation area will be required) 5,226 Public Benefit Mitigation/Off-site/1 N206CB04000 (A separate easement for the VC mitigation area will be required) 1,800 IF-Y-1 Conditions Attached F Development Figures Attached (5) ❑Planting Plan Attached ❑Geotech Report Required This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 4 CWS He Number 16-001665 TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS CRITERIA The proposed project will result in encroachment exceeding 30% of the depth of the 50-foot wide vegetated corridor, requiring a Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis. The project will meet all of the Tier 2 criteria outlined in CWS'R&O Design and Construction Standards. Details are described below. 3.07.4.c.1 The proposed encroachment area is mitigated in accordance with Section 3.08. The project requires mitigation for a total of 0.12 acres of permanent vegetated corridor impact. To mitigate for the impacts,the applicant is proposing 0.04 acres of on-site replacement vegetated corridor mitigation (at 1:1 replacement ratio). The existing condition of the replacement mitigation area is in degraded condition and will be enhanced to good condition, per the attached Vegetated Corridor Enhancement Planting Specification Tables(Appendix E). The project will require 0.12 acres (5,226 square feet)of off-site replacement vegetated corridor mitigation (based on 1.5:1 off- site replacement ratio). The off-site mitigation area is located at the McKay Fields site, which is situated off of West Union Road in North Plains (see attached Figure 10).The off-site replacement mitigation area is located continuous and adjacent to an existing 50-foot wide vegetated corridor associated with McKay Creek, previously permitted under CWS File No.2013-001827. The mitigation meets the requirements set forth in Section 3.08 of CWS' R&O Design and Construction Standards.The off-site mitigation area includes approximately 1,800 square feet of additional mitigation area to serve as public benefit mitigation. 3.07.4.c.2 The replacement mitigation protects the functions and values of the Vegetated Corridor and Sensitive Area. The on-site and off-site replacement mitigation areas are continuous with the existing 50-foot vegetated corridor.The existing condition of the on-site replacement mitigation area was determined to be in degraded condition. The installation of native trees and shrubs will increase structural diversity, resulting in increased functional capacities. The native plantings will also provide thermal regulation to the water temperature in the nearby tributary to Red Rock Creek (onsite)and McKay Creek(offsite), as well as create riparian habitat and nutrient recycling for the organisms in the riparian areas. Therefore, the replacement mitigation proposed would protect as well as improve the functions and values of the vegetated corridor and the associated sensitive areas. 3.07.4.c.3 Enhancement of the replacement area, if not already in Good Corridor Condition, and either the remaining Vegetated Corridor on the site or the first 50 feet of width closest to the resource, whichever is less, to a Good Corridor Condition. The site will have approximately 0.33 acres of remaining on-site degraded condition vegetated corridor. The remaining 0.33 acres, in addition to the 0.04 acres of on-site replacement vegetated corridor mitigation area,will be enhanced to good condition, per CWS standards, per the attached Planting Specification Tables(Appendix E).The Site Plan also includes planting the 0.05 acres of temporarily disturbed vegetated corridor to good condition. 3.07.4.c.5 Location of development and site planning minimizes incursion into the Vegetated Corridor. The proposed layout provides the least amount of vegetated corridor impact possible while achieving the project's goals. The City is requiring a sidewalk through the site to provide pedestrian connectivity from SW Dartmouth Street to SW 72nd Avenue. Due to topographic constraints, the location of the sidewalk requires the building to be moved to the north, closer to the vegetated corridor. Site topography also pushes the building location towards the northern, flatter portion of the site, as the City is requiring the building entrance to be at street grade.The Project Architect incorporated an undesirable jag into the building to reduce vegetated corridor encroachment closest to the on-site wetland boundary. The remaining encroachment from the building is necessary to accommodate the minimum building size. Retaining walls have been incorporated to minimize vegetated corridor encroachment. The applicant reduced the size of the proposed parking area and shifted the building to the south in order to maintain a minimum 25-foot wide vegetated corridor. Therefore,the proposed Site Plan provides the least practical incursion into vegetated corridor. 3.07.4.c.6 No practicable alternative to the location of the development exists that will not disturb the Sensitive Area or Vegetated Corridor. There is no practical alternative layout that would avoid vegetated corridor encroachment. The medical building requires a one- story facility. The applicant has specific requirements regarding level parking for patients and staff, with the minimal acceptable parking shown on the Site Plan and optimal parking levels exceeding that amount. In addition to the applicant's expressed parking requirements, it is the expert opinion of the Project Architect, who has designed multiple buildings for the specific type of medical use proposed, that the number of parking spaces shown are the minimum required for this type of user. Substantial (both in length and height) retaining walls at the top and bottom of the site have been incorporated to minimize vegetated corridor encroachment. Page 2 c.14 CWS MIe Number 16.001563 3.07.4.c.7 The proposed encroachment provides public benefits. The Site Plan includes 1,800 square feet of additional public benefit vegetated corridor area located continuous and adjacent to the existing 50-foot wide vegetated corridor at the McKay Fields site.The location of the public benefit area is shown on attached Figure 10.According to the property owner, the public benefit mitigation area has already been enhanced to good condition. The addition of enhanced riparian buffer area adjacent to McKay Creek and wetlands will provide a net water quality public benefit. In order to comply with Clean Water Services water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: 1. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area or Vegetated Corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed in R&O 07-20, Chapter 3. 2. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the Vegetated Corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During construction the Vegetated Corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by R&O 07-20, Section 3.06.1 and per approved plans. 3. If there is any activity within the sensitive area,the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). The applicant shall provide Clean Water Services or its designee (appropriate city)with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. 4. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon. 5. Prior to ground disturbance an erosion control permit is required. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's)for Erosion Control, in accordance with Clean Water Services' Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual,shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 6. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from Clean Water Services or its designee is required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.13. 7. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 5.10. 8. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable. 9. If applicable, the water quality facility shall be planted with Clean Water Services approved native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. 10. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by Clean Water Services,the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 11. The Vegetated Corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50 feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area. 12. For Vegetated Corridors up to 50 feet wide, the applicant shall enhance the entire Vegetated Corridor to meet or exceed good corridor condition as defined in R&O 07-20, Section 3.14.2, Table 3-3. 13. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide Clean Water Services with a Vegetated Corridor enhancement/restoration plan. Enhancement/restoration of the Vegetated Corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 07-20, Appendix A. 14. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the Vegetated Corridor shall be removed per methods described in Clean Water Services' Integrated Pest Management Plan. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native tree and shrub species. Page 3 of 4 CWS File Number 16-001663 15. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Landscape Requirements (R&0 07-20, Appendix A). 16. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 2.11.2. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level,the owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two-year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 17. Performance assurances for the Vegetated Corridor shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 2.06.2,Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. 18. Clean Water Services will require an easement over the on-site Vegetated Corridor and the mitigated Vegetated Corridor on tax lot 1N206CB04000 conveying storm and surface water management to Clean Water Services that would prevent the owner of the Vegetated Corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose of the corridor and any easements therein. FINAL PLANS 19. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. In the details section of the plans, a description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials is required. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification and shall remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 20. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 21. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the Vegetated Corridor(indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition), Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 22. Protection of the Vegetated Corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of the Vegetated Corridors. Fencing and signage details to be included on final construction plans. This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached. Please call (503) 681-3653 with any questions. Amb r Wierck Environmental Plan Review Attachments (5) Page 4 of 4 4- sn. ynkmu —.,2 pga, c c c c c c I 3'1 00 T I xl> "IV . . . . . . . . . . . . BELE Y- 0 z 77 r- -1-612( NG IPA ES Z 1p 10 S�j Tm /r� �� ,j� /i���f� VT T I A r14.H I X1366 / / / ` f�`�/ j��/ /' --/ / - / /���' � 113 f �// / � /� /� ////// // `��'Ay� j/ ,// /� r- c r \l 13cn'9 T U lie PERMANENT VEGETATED CORRIDOR IMPACT VEGETATED CORRIDOR MITIGATION AREA = 0.04 ACRES c-,,- AREA = 0.12 ACRES TO BE PLANTED TO GOOD CONDITIONS PER ATTACHED SITE PL m of hkl'nklr- r=r1rWATInki TAPI 9: �-�---_ -� �.__ --�------•art \ � l y 1 ` �1 - -COZ \r�r\`\ -orz-- 111\\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ .- _16( +r8 \ \ \ `\ \ \\ \ 1 1 \�' \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \• \ t� - INNN Now _ t 1 �\ \1111\1 � ~1111 IN C \C C Trl 1 f 1 \ kam -p ROPOs' D STORMWATER C C iTREATMENT MANHOLE PROPOSED FLOW i� ,� ,•� 'L�i j i DIVERSION MANHOLE k " / � � /� % •' i' f o� `,! ,. 36,000 -SF; PROPOSED DETEN110N / /i �_ �,� r' ,JI �, / / TANKS , 1 _ /E1-- 2� `, �I / Iii• //I �� .-.•"� - ` In PROPOSED ROOF DRAIN CONNECTION (T)P) U ' T66 til �S r '�_ - •�j. �� ' l f KrING SPA ES i PROPOSED SANITARY SERVICE jj PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (TY?) TR-A5 H- • 113 6 5 1136,1 r PRELIMINARY STOR a jI M TAX LOT 100 Doc \ ` / EX 60' CMP C TAX MAP 25101 BA 5? ' 181. 7 (6 NW) TLAN E NO WETLAN F SITE WETLAND �o RIPING, ' ` 1 'STREAM, i AND, SEE NOTE 10 rn' ' / S89'23'S8°E 50 .5% SLPE :4 / I--JJ� j(JI WE AND FILL PER 1" VC O1CJTFA EYAT Of31�bR -`� 111j�r DSL PERMIT N0. ,� � / '�/G � R� � �/ � �I�I .•.•. ,562 0 50 VEGET•AT�D RR R / / p I I , �/ �`YP. 1. UTILITIES SHOi MARKINGS PEF 18001506 ANO THAT THE UN( VM19$LEDT}?L EXE � T IN THE AREA. J I / --- '�� ' L�--`✓J� / P D ALL E1asrlNc I FIELD WORK W MAPIT0IBA / ��i��// STM - 3. VWCAL Dan Itt M: J tStS I f J c� / DATUM,PER C IE �' ,=u / CORNER OF 7. F (J � ELEVAIiDN OF N. 4 c� —t' `r%i l' 4. THIS MAP DOE f 1 c'. 5. SURVEY ON -CHAIN I�)lE C ` /��� ��� � W L /////� `TM^CBy o�Z 6. eunor�1c�001 07HERVASE.C( IITARY SEWER EASEMENT//� � I Il� ,� � /// /� /� /r � �� ' ' '� BUWNGTI� /j/ �G 0SS EA: 4.54 XCR S // /�jC /�I`I : {12=g}J f �. coNTouR at1E NO. 2014-047525 �/ ��J/� � , / //�f // �' 1�" -� ; 8. TREES x1TN 01 DIAMETERS NE ' 9 ./ �! BREAST HEIGH 9. STREAM AND 1 �3r5rQ���11 // //� Y' f DATED MMAARCH / ( //��'o/// ��/� /�// ////�///�� / // ✓j _— 10. WETLAND DOUI DSL NJ 2014 81'52j52-W295 .59' j���j /�� X30- CHAIN LINK FENCEULZ— �- 52 52"W 214 01, ~- / rA �M A�2g1 A 1 tl.<lr;F s01�1i1,$S -�,� TAX LOT 401 I / / BUILDfNG nl�lfnrya-L `(`�TAX MAP 2S101BA / �/ / / I EXISTING CONDI' m I o t v $ oo 00 PLAN CDCD ED CD in V m 00 to Tax Lot 4000 1z� I \ Map1 N2-6CB 1, 304\ ::� 1 1 . PUb�IC w I� For CWS File 16-001563 Sf1 Bea.eflt Triangle MOB City of North Plains Aitigatiol�s�_._ � � �l �� Pe.destrain Pathway 1 ,800 Easement LLI 0 --- ,, Replaceme 1 1 I lbs 1 111 z 79- -! I Z-.1-- 5,226 sf 1 1 \ ! ► ti McKa}�Fjelds I I I 1�1 yimn II 11 11110 x VC Creation 13-001379.1k I \ 2,400 sf � Mit.igation n- Ature Miti ation ����� `���9� VC Creation d ` g 13-001824- 3,416 sfsf � ever ������'`�-� ��1�. . „ �N�'BiYd� � ' • �. ��rl/--s��.� \\ \ 1 411 �{f y•an. 1 Y.r47tr. ` Dunn rat*,. www.tvfr.com Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue October 10, 2016 Chuck Gregory AKS Gary Pagenstecher City of Tigard 13155 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: City of Tigard - Triangle Office Building PDR 2016-00011 SDR 2016-00007 Tax Map 2S101 BA Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development project. These notes are provided in regards to the plans updated August 2016. There may be more or less requirements needed based upon the final project design, however, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue will endorse this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: 1. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed driving surface width of not less than 20 feet (26 feet adjacent to fire hydrants (OFC D103.1)) and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. The fire district will approve access roads of 12 feet for up to three dwelling units and accessory buildings. (OFC 503.2.1 & D103.1) Assure that the awning at the entrance is a minimum 13 feet 6 inches high for apparatus access. 2. NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. (OFC D103.6) 3 NO PARKING: Parking on emergency access roads shall be as follows (OFC D103.6.1-2): 1. 20-26 feet road width — no parking on either side of roadway 2. 26-32 feet road width — parking is allowed on one side 3. Greater than 32 feet road width — parking is not restricted North Operating Center Command&Business Operations Center South Operating Center Training Center 20665 SW Blanton Street and Central Operating Center 8445 SW Elligsen Road 12400 SW Tonquin Road Aloha,Oregon 97078 11945 SW 70"Avenue Wilsonville,Oregon Sherwood,Oregon 503-649-8577 Tigard,Oregon 97223-9196 97070-9641 97140-9734 503-649-8577 503-649-8577 503-259-1600 4. PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red (or as approved) and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at 25 foot intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background (or as approved). (OFC 503.3) 5. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet and shall extend 20 feet before and after the point of the hydrant. (OFC D103.1) 6. SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). Documentation from a registered engineer that the final construction is in accordance with approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code may be requested. (OFC 503.2.3) 7. ACCESS DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. Temporary address signage shall also be provided during construction. (OFC 3309 and 3310.1) FIREFIGHTING WATER SUPPLIES: 8. COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS— REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum fire flow and flow duration for buildings other than one- and two-family dwellings shall be determined in accordance with residual pressure (OFC Table 13105.2). The required fire flow for a building shall not exceed the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. Note: OFC 6106, Limiting Fire-Flow is also enforced, except for the following: • In areas where the water system is already developed, the maximum needed fire flow shall be either 3,000 GPM or the available flow in the system at 20 psi, whichever is greater. • In new developed areas, the maximum needed fire flow shall be 3,000 GPM at 20 psi. • Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue does not adopt Occupancy Hazards Modifiers in section 6105.4-6105.4.1 9. FIRE FLOW WATER AVAILABILITY: Applicants shall provide documentation of a fire hydrant flow test or flow test modeling of water availability from the local water purveyor if the project includes a new structure or increase in the floor area of an existing structure. Tests shall be conducted from a fire hydrant within 400 feet for commercial projects, or 600 feet for residential development. Flow tests will be accepted if they were performed within 5 years as long as no adverse modifications have been made to the supply system. Water availability information may not be required to be submitted for every project. (OFC Appendix B) 10. WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (OFC 3312.1) FIRE HYDRANTS: 11. FIRE HYDRANTS—COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. (OFC 507.5.1) 2 • This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. • The number and distribution of fire hydrants required for commercial structure(s) is based on Table C105.1, following any fire-flow reductions allowed by section 8105.3.1. Additional fire hydrants may be required due to spacing and/or section 507.5 of the Oregon Fire Code. 12. FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Table C 105.1. (OFC Appendix C) 13. FIRE HYDRANT(S) PLACEMENT: (OFC C104) • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. (OFC 507.5.1) • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets may be considered when approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 14. PRIVATE FIRE HYDRANT IDENTIFICATION: Private fire hydrants shall be painted red in color. Exception: Private fire hydrants within the City of Tualatin shall be yellow in color. (OFC 507) 15. FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway unless approved by the fire code official. (OFC C102.1) 16. REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of blue reflective markers. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the center line of the access roadway that the fire hydrant is located on. In the case that there is no center line, then assume a center line and place the reflectors accordingly. (OFC 507) 17. PHYSICAL PROTECTION: Where fire hydrants are subject to impact by a motor vehicle, guard posts, bollards or other approved means of protection shall be provided. (OFC 507.5.6 & OFC 312) 18. CLEAR SPACE AROUND FIRE HYDRANTS: A 3 foot clear space shall be provided around the circumference of fire hydrants. (OFC 507.5.5) 19. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (FDC) LOCATIONS: FDCs shall be located within 100 feet of a fire hydrant(or as approved). Hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway or drive aisle, fully visible, and recognizable from the street or nearest point of the fire department vehicle access or as otherwise approved. (OFC 912.2.1 & NFPA 13) • Fire department connections (FDCs) shall normally be located remotely and outside of the fall-line of the building when required. FDCs may be mounted on the building they serve, when approved. • FDCs shall be plumbed on the system side of the check valve when sprinklers are served by underground lines also serving private fire hydrants. Assure that the FDC and associated hydrant within 100 feet are accessible from 72nd and to the structure. BUILDING ACCESS AND FIRE SERVICE FEATURES 3 20. EMERGENCY RESPONDER RADIO COVERAGE: In new buildings where the design reduces the level of radio coverage for public safety communications systems below minimum performance levels, a distributed antenna system, signal booster, or other method approved by TVF&R and Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency shall be provided. (OSSC 915.1; OFC 510.1) a. Emergency responder radio system testing and/or system installation is required for this building. Please contact me (using my contact info below) for further information including an alternate means of compliance that is available. If the alternate method is preferred, it must be requested from TVF&R prior to issuance of building permit. 21. KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access may be required for structures and gates. See Appendix C for further information and detail on required installations. Order via www.tvfr.com or contact TVF&R for assistance and instructions regarding installation and placement. (OFC 506.1) 22. UTILITY IDENTIFICATION: Rooms containing controls to fire suppression and detection equipment shall be identified as "Fire Control Room." Signage shall have letters with a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 1/2 inch, and be plainly legible, and contrast with its background. (OFC 509.1) 23. PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers; building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property, including monument signs. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 1/2 inch. (OFC 505.1) Applicant may apply for use of alternate materials and methods(AM&M)in accordance with 2014 Oregon Fire Code(OFC), Section 104.9. A -guideline for Alternate Materials & Methods requests is available. If you have questions or need further clarification, please feel free to contact me at(503) 259-1504. Sincerely, Yi� wom ff John Wolff I Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Direct: 503-259-1504 Wolff.iohnf(a)tvfr.com www.tvfr.com Cc: 4 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes December 5,2016 CALL TO ORDER President Fitzgerald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Fitzgerald Vice President Feeney Commissioner Hu Commissioner Middaugh Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Commissioner Mooney Commissioner Enloe Absent: Commissioner Jelinek; Commissioner Lieuallen; Commissioner McDowell Staff Present: Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant; Kim McMillan, Assistant City Engineer COMMUNICATIONS —None. CONSIDER MINUTES November 21, 2016 Meeting Minutes: President Fitzgerald asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the November 21 minutes; there being none, President Fitzgerald declared the minutes approved as submitted. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 17, 2016 TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT- PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2016-00011; SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2016-00007 REQUEST: The applicant requests concurrent Planned Development Concept Plan and Detailed Development Plan review for a 36,000 square foot medical office building on a 3.73- acre vacant parcel located southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking taking access from SW Dartmouth through the eastern access to the adjacent Walmart development. A pedestrian path is proposed through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot. A vegetated corridor December 5, 2016 Page 1 of 6 along the northern property line is protected and improved. LOCATION: SW of the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street;Washington County Tax Map 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00300. ZONES: C-G: general commercial district, with planned development overlay. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS President Fitzgerald read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions; there were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: All present. Commissioner Muldoon, Feeney, Schmidt, Hu. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. STAFF REPORT The staff irport is available on-line at the City website one week prior to the hearing. Tom McGuire, Assistant Community Development Director was sitting in in-lieu of Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher who was out on vacation. Tom told the commissioners that they have copies of everything that's come in from the applicant and from a neighboring property owner. He said the applicant would address that during their presentation. He said the applicant submitted a letter from AKS in which they specifically asked—should the Planning Commission decide to approve the concept plan and the detailed plan, they've asked that some language be added to condition 17 and that conditions 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 be removed because they've been satisfied and no longer apply; the changes have been provided and are now in the record. President Fitzgerald asked "Is it to staff's satisfaction?" Yes. We're in agreement with those with one change. On condition 17 — they had some added language, a sentence at the end that we would like to make a change to. Currently the last sentence of their proposal is "The easement will specify that the access rights are limited to tax lot 300 and that the adjacent property owners must independently retain access right over Walmart's property." We would like to amend that to instead simply say, "Adjacent property owners must independently obtain access rights over Walmart's property." Basically add that sentence to the current condition 17. QUESTIONS—None. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Mimi Doukas, AKS Engineering said they'd taken the feedback from the last meeting quite seriously. She noted the document submitted by AKS dated November 21 addressed many of the requests and questions. She said they'd done an enhanced corridor in terms of pedestrian seating and landscape treatment. They've put more detail into that to address the soil volume. The retaining wall has been stepped so that it's not one monolithic wall, but is broken into two walls. So that gives us an opportunity to introduce additional landscape treatment through there and allows the opening up of the design of that retaining wall so that the swale volumes are more substantial—ensuring that they're complying with the Tigard Tree Code and also ensuring the longevity opportunity for growth for those trees. They also added a wetland viewing facility December 5, 2016 Page 2 of 6 at the NE corner of the site. That will be a landscape treatment and viewing platform that involves basalt stones that are laid down on their sides so that there are seating opportunities along with the viewing opportunities of the wetland. That will be detailed out more through the construction documents but conceptually that's the design that we've accounted for. That's gone through our wetland biologist, we've talked to CWS making sure that is in fact something we can build, and that it works with the right-of-way standards within the City as well. As to the request to look into a pedestrian connection going north, that would have a very high expense, difficult logistics, impact to the site design, and considering the majority of users of the building—probably not be well used. After researching this extensively, we concluded that it doesn't make sense for this site, and we don't believe it's a good option. Another question from the last hearing was the possibility that some other end user might go into this site. This site is specifically designed for an oncology facility. The site and building design, the grating design is all predicated on that oncology user. The expense of the construction is very high because of that and that expense would not match any other end user — so if prior to construction of the site, this user fell out— somebody else wanted to come in, then it would be cost effective and logical for the applicant to come back in and go through a new site plan review rather than building a profoundly expensive structure. Brian Bennett— Base Camp 1, LLC, commented on that as well. He said, "We have a lease, so we have up to a 30-year commitment already on the site. So it's not something that we're going to change." Brian also addressed the safety of the retaining wall. He met with Tigard staff at the site — they walked through the site and came up with the solution of basalt blocks to help with the safety; so he said they added that. At this point, Brian went over some 3D graphics showing, among other things the topography and the wetland viewing area. QUESTIONS —None. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—None. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION Bill Kabeiseman, of the law firm Bateman-Siedel was testifying on behalf of the owner of the adjacent property. He distributed his testimony in written form (Exhibit A) and read through it. Main points: • The proposal fails to protect the natural features of the site. • The pedestrian improvements are unnecessary and violate city code —it provides a "path to nowhere." • Applicant's engineer acknowledges drainage error. • The applicant has not met the street connectivity requirements of the code. • The application fails to meet requirements for access, egress, and circulation • You can do something better. December S, 2016 Page 3 of 6 QUESTIONS—None. APPLICANT REBUTTAL—Dana Krawczuk of Perkins Koie law firm, representing the applicant addressed the testimony in opposition. She said that a couple of the big picture issues are the access to Walmart. We've talked about this a number of times. We can't provide access over property we don't own, or property we don't have the right to grant public access over. The conditions reflect that. The request on condition #17 was just to clarify that; that we have if they want to cross onto Walmart's property, they need to obtain that access right if they can. We are going to work with Walmart to try to get that public access easement. We've had ongoing conversations. Walmart is open to having the pedestrian access easement be open to the public. They're not excited about carte blanche so any kind of vehicles can come over without knowing more about what other development might look like. At one point all of these properties were held in common. There was an opportunity to provide covenants for access. When Walmart came through, there was an opportunity to require public access;we are next in line. We are going to provide public access over our property, but we can't make up for decisions that were made in the past to not secure that public access; so we're doing what we can. In terms of the path being a "path to nowhere," we think it's a nice amenity. We think it is part of the fabric of creating connectivity. It's expensive, but we're willing to do it and we think it's important— and we think you should keep it as part of the site plan. Chuck Gregory, civil engineer from AKS Engineering, spoke about the grading and drainage. Our retaining wall is about 25' from the property line. The building jogs out to almost 75 feet from the property line and then jogs back in to about 45 feet. Within those dimensions we are not doing grading at all. There is absolutely no drainage that we're altering within that zone going towards their property. We will make sure that through the building permit process, that we will not be draining on their property. If anything,we have reduced the amount of water draining towards them because nearly half that site drained towards that property. We're cutting it off with the building,we're providing storm water detentions, storm water treatment, and we're releasing downstream of their property. So at the end of the day, when the site is developed out, the only thing draining towards their property is the wetlands and the buffer— and that's always been there. Brian Bennett spoke about topography. He noted that some of the comments about topography that had just been made lead you to believe that the code says that you can't test the topography. We all know the Tigard Triangle has significant topography throughout and that- in combination with the fact that it's a commercially zoned area - leads to having to deal with the topography. You have to somehow flatten those sites to build—Walmart has retaining walls, Costco has retaining walls, Red Rock Creek Medical Center across the street has retaining walls, TVF&R has retaining walls, Winco—retaining walls, etc. It's "How do you respond to the site appropriately? And how do you protect what's most important and try to come up with the best overall plan." We believe we've worked very hard to deal with a somewhat difficult site to do that. Dana Krawczuk concluded: "Do something better." That's a strong statement. I challenge you to do better than providing a needed medical service with extremely high paying jobs. If you have a family member who needs top cancer treatment—you'd be thrilled to have this in your December 5, 2016 Page 4 of 6 community. We've gone through three public hearings, there are hundreds of pages of information in the record; we've met with your staff for hours. Yet they challenge you to do better than that. We have put forth a terrific effort, and I feel like we are bordering on "Nimby- ism" in terms of opposing this project. It is a high quality project; commissioners, if you want to do something better, send a message that this is approvable - this evening. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DELIBERATION ON CONCEPT PLAN • Can we confirm that the pathway along the south side of the property is ADA compliant? • The applicant has to prove ADA compliance where it's required. As a planning commission, we're looking at "can it be achievable?" I believe it is. So far as grading— you're going to have walls no matter how you look at the site. It's rare you break those walls up. I like that they broke up the large retaining wall by having it terraced. It looks much nicer with the landscaping— they've taken that extra step. So far as drainage — as a developer, you can't adversely affect your neighbor; you can't worsen the scenario. • I wouldn't recommend that we provide much weight to the testimony in opposition we've heard tonight; I did not find it compelling or fact-based. • I had a concern with the retaining wall. I like the concept now. I like that it's terraced and will have some landscaping. I like what I see. • I like what I see as well. They've gone through some extra steps. They've come a long way to meet our recommendations and answer our questions. • I agree with what's been said. • I appreciate the effort the applicant went to in providing the 3D modeling we asked for. That was helpful. They explain a lot and give an extra element. We sent them away with some strong words —do better—that was from all of us. The wetland viewing area —that was a little more than I was expecting. I'm happy to see it. CONCEPT PLAN MOTION Commissioner Muldoon made the following motion: "I move that the Planning Commission approve Tigard Triangle Medical Office Building Planned Development Review PDR2016-00011 and Site Development Review SDR2016-00007." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Feeney. VOTE—All in favor, none opposed RESULT: MOTION TO APPROVE CONCEPT PLAN PASSES UNANIMOUSLY December 5, 2016 Page 5 of 6 DETAILED PLAN MOTION Commissioner Muldoon made the following motion: "I move that the Tigard Triangle Medical Office Building Planned Development Review PDR2016-00011, and Site Development Review SDR2016-00007 Detailed Plan, be approved - strilring conditions 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 34, and modifying Condition 17 to add "Adjacent property owners must independently obtain access rights over Walmart's property." The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schmidt. VOTE All in favor, none opposed. RESULT: MOTION TO APPROVE DETAILED PLAN PASSES UNANIMOUSLY OTHER BUSINESS—Tom McGuire referred to the newly revised rolling calendar and said that staff had tentatively set up a Tigard Triangle Tour for Feb 13 and a tour of River Terrace for April 17 [these dates have since been changed]. Tom also reminded them that every odd year is a Planning Commission officer's election year. At the first meeting of 2017, there will be elections for the office of President and Vice President. ADJOURNMENT President Fitzgerald adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning-CommAsion Secretary ATTEST: President Fitz rald December 5, 2016 Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A B atema eidel Bill Kabeiseman billkab(Rbatemanseidel.com www.batemanseidel.coni Telephone DID: 503.972.9960 Fax DID: 503.972.9968 December 5,2016 via e-mail: garyp@tigard-or.gov Tigard Planning Commission c/o Gary Pagenstecher, Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97232 Re: Tigard Triangle Medical Office Building Case ID Nos: Planned Development Review PDR2016-00011 Site Development Review (SDR)2016-00007 Dear Commissioners: This firm continues to represent Gordon R. Martin,Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust(the "Trust"), which owns the property immediately adjacent to the site of this proposed development. This letter is our final response to the applicant's various and lengthy submittals. The Trust remains opposed to the proposed development for the various reasons we have discussed, as well as additional reasons explained below. We continue to urge the Planning Commission to reject this application. The Proposal Fails to Protect the Natural Features of the Site. TDC 18.350.050.A.1 requires the applicant to protect the natural features on the site; it does not permit the destruction of the natural features if some portion is otherwise protected. In addition, TDC 18.350.070.D.La requires the applicant to design and locate development on the site"to preserve the existing trees,topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible." Avoiding the filling of a wetlands does not thereby make it acceptable to destroy other natural features of the site. If the City's code,requiring the protection of the natural slope and preservation of topography and natural drainage, were enforced, the big retaining walls on the North, South, East, and West side of the site would be avoided. Moreover, the wetland that applicant purports to avoid is small in size, of very low quality,has been previously mitigated, and is largely unnoticeable. In contrast, the natural slope of the site is immediately evident to everyone. Protecting the natural slope would make fencing around the site unnecessary,provide walkability, eliminate large retaining walls, and avoid the appearance of a fortress, allowing the building to be integrated with the adjacent streets. Bateman eidel December 5, 2016 Page 2 The applicant has provided new sketches from AKS that purport to give some perspective on the site. However,those sketches show a view from within the site,which is not where the problem lies. The problems lie with the site's integration with the neighborhood and views into the site. Other sketches show a birds eye view of the site and telescopic views of the fence from off-site; these depictions are carefully chosen to distort the everyday view as it will actually appear to its neighbors. The true effect of the fences around the site will be extremely unpleasant and are antithetical to the Triangle goal regarding walkability because the applicant has chosen to not integrate with 72nd,the future 74th, and Dartmouth Street to the north. The retaining walls are too large and should be no greater than what appears on the site after recent grading as they already approach over 8 feet in height. By protecting the natural slope features of the site, fences will be unnecessary and sidewalks from the street will meet ADA standards. The applicant has chosen to follow a course that isolates its property from the neighborhood. The applicant chose not raise the site or implement a two or more level site with a building that has more than one floor. It is the end user that would like a flat site where it does not properly fit, that wants to ignore street connectivity, and wants to create an unpleasant site for those who will live and work nearby and must view it on a daily basis. A raised or two story building would significantly improve the integration of the development with 72nd Avenue. The Triangle, adjacent properties, and owners have been ignored as they will encounter the unpleasant fortress daily that does not promote walkability for anyone, including those with disabilities that work at the facility. The Pedestrian Improvements Are Unnecessary and Violate City Code. The pedestrian pathway that is referred to in the application under 18.350.050.A.4 and is useless and unsafe and incorrectly characterized as a shorter and safe path. City Code does not require a pedestrian pathway unless it substantially shortens a pedestrian route, which this one is not. This pathway is neither shorter nor is it safe. The proposed pathway is a longer route than following existing sidewalks and streets and it is inherently unsafe. This pathway does not help the project meet Concept Plan criteria, nor is it a required pathway. Moreover,the project does not provide its own sidewalk connection to the streets,nor does it provide required walkways across the site. By not having its own sidewalk connection to the streets the development does not meet ADA standards and City Codes. TDC 18.620.030.D, 18.705.030.F.1 and 3, 18.705.030.G.Lc, 18.810.070.A,and 18.810.070.B.2. In addition, the pedestrian improvements are not being required to connect to Wal-Mart's existing pedestrian facilities. The proposed conditions of approval only requires that the connection be made"if permitted by Wal-Mart." (See proposed condition of approval 7.) As noted above,the pedestrian improvements are largely useless anyway; however, if they cannot even be connected to the Wal-Mart facilities the pedestrian improvements would be a pedestrian B atemar eidel December 5,2016 Page 3 "path to nowhere." Without permission to connect to the facilities on the Wal-Mart property,the Plans should be denied. The pedestrian connection also does not comply with TDC 18.620.020.A.I as it is not a street, much less a "public street"as required by the code. Further, only the Design Option requires a pedestrian path. The Performance Option does not require a pedestrian path because Code requirements are already met. The pedestrian pathway is not ADA compliant with grades well over 8%. The project does not provide any ADA friendly access from the streets. It is not ADA accessible. The argument that the project is ADA compliant is false. Further, it makes no sense for a development to build a useless and unsafe pedestrian path that is not required as in this case. However, it does make sense if the development is attempting to use it to show it has significant advantages over a standard development(when it does not); to bypass ADA standards (because the project does not meet them); and to not provide other required walkways on the project site (because they have not been included). Finally, in addition to not meeting the criteria of the City's development code,the pathway does not meet walkway standards in City Code nor does it meet ADA standards. Handicapped spaces are required by law and so are walkways that meet ADA standards. It is presumptuous to assume no patients would arrive without a vehicle and it is extremely presumptuous to assume that employees with disabilities will not use sidewalks to reach work. Access to the site from the surrounding streets must be ADA compliant. City Code states that required walkways must be ADA friendly. There is no ADA friendly access from a street to the building front entry. It is especially ironic that it is a medical facility that would fail to meet these basic standards. Applicant's Engineer Acknowledges Drainage Error. In the November 28,2016, submittal from AKS, AKS acknowledges that"in re-grading the area, a low point up against the proposed retaining wall resulted in order to minimize the height of the retaining walls." In other words,AKS acknowledges that the development is already failing to meet the design that they have put forth. They do ask for guidance about how to fix it and ask whether they should put the contour back(and avoid further damage to the neighbor)or put in a wholly new swale. We urge the Planning Commission to acknowledge the error and choose option one—removing the 187 contour and "construct the retaining wall to match the existing grade." The Applicant Has Not Met the Street Connectivity Requirements of the Code. In addressing TDC 18.620.020,the applicant provides various alternate street connections, but those alternate street connections do not consider reasonable alternatives;the applicant provides an abundance of information regarding unreasonable alternatives, but no genuine attempt was made to provide for the street on the development site. However, Option 8—provided by the applicant later in the process—easily provides for a reasonable street connection. Bateman eidel December 5,2016 Page 4 As explained in our November 21, 2016, letter,the City should consider whether the information supplied by the development in response to 18.620.020 is reasonable and is in the best interest of the City in general. In response to the pre-application of the applicant,the City asked Laurence Qamar to prepare a review for the street connection between 72nd and 74th. According to that review,the best location for a street connection between 72nd and 74th must cross the subject site. The development does not state it will preserve the necessary right-of-way over its property as indicated by the City review showing where the street is to be best located. The Concept Plan and Detailed Plan should reflect the street connection and provide the necessary ROW on the subject site(see Option 8 with improvements) or be denied. The parking lot connectivity suggested by the applicant does not meet the requirements of TDC 18.620.020. Most importantly,the streets are not public, as required by the code. Moreover, the approach ignores the topographically constrained portion of the adjacent site to the south. It also ignores the three story 6,000 square foot home that blocks any street. The"parking lot street" approach submitted by the applicant does not meet the code and is not possible. The City should follow the review that represents the most reasonable and least impactful street based on City Codes, and that review was prepared by Laurence Qamar. Finally, even if the parking lot street approach were allowed, the width of the access easement to the adjacent property to the south is not specified and must be wide enough to meet City Code requirements for retail or multi-family use. This requires a condition of approval. The Application Fails to Meet Requirements for Access, Egress and Circulation. Under 18.350.070.C.2, the application is required to meet the provisions of TDC Chapter 18.705, regarding access, egress, and circulation; an exception may be allowed,but only with certain demonstrations from an engineer,which are not present here. In particular,the application does not comply with 18.705.030.F.1, which sets certain requirements for walkway locations. In this case,there is no on-site pedestrian walkways that extend from the building entrance to the streets that provide the required access and egress. A public pedestrian pathway does not meet this requirement. The pedestrian pathway is also not a convenient connection and is not ADA friendly or safe as it does not connect with any sidewalk on the Wal-Mart site. In addition,the application does not comply with 18.705.030.F.3, which requires walkways to extend to the street and comply with ADA standards. This Code provision is not met. Conclusion. In short,there are any number of criteria that have not been met as detailed above and in our previous testimony and this proposal should be denied; the Concept and Detailed Plan cannot be reasonably and safely approved. The root cause of all of the identified problems arise from the choice made by the developer to (1)not preserve the natural topography of the site under TDC Bateman eidel December 5, 2016 Page 5 18.350.050.A.1 and TDC 18.350.070.D.1.a and(2)not meeting street connectivity requirements of 18.620.020. If those two critical provisions were met,then,e.g.,ADA compliant sidewalks to the streets would have been provided and large retaining walls would not be needed along with endless fencing. The applicant's refusal to acknowledge the code's requirement to preserve natural features and provide street connectivity is the cause of the problems and this application should be denied until these issues are resolved. Very 'yours, Bill Kabeiseman BK:kms B atema eidel Bill Kabeiseman bilikab@batemonseidel.com www.batemonseidel.com Telephone DID: 503.972.9960 Fax DID: 503.972.9968 January 30, 2017 Tigard City Council c/o Gary Pagenstecher, Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97232 Re: Tigard Triangle Medical Office Building Case ID No. Planned Development Review PDR2016-00011 Site Development Review SDR 2016-00007 Honorable Mayor Cook and Councilors: This firm represents Gordon R. Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust, owner of several properties immediately adjacent to the application site. Mr. Martin has appealed this matter to the Council for one reason —to improve the Triangle street system efficiency and development potential.t We are not here to ask the Council to deny the development of this large outpatient clinic, but to require the development to conform to the city's development code and make the improvements that are required to fit within the Triangle. More particularly, Mr. Martin asks that the City require the applicant to accommodate the practical extension of Elmhurst Street from 72nd Avenue to the future 74'Avenue that links to the Southwest Corridor project recently approved for further study in the November 8, 2016, election. The Planning Commission approved the development under the belief the Elmhurst Street extension would not be precluded by this development. This belief relied upon a future street plan the applicant indicated would be feasible, but which, in reality, is impractical and not reasonably feasible. Not only is the applicants' future street plan impractical, the development permanently precludes the only known practical and least impactful Elmhurst Street extension. To restate, ' The focus of this appeal is street connectivity; however, we raised a variety of other important issues regarding the development before the Planning Commission. Although those issues are important, we chose to focus on the one issue that has the most impact on the future of this area. Tigard City Council January 30, 2017 Page 2 if the practical Elmhurst Street extension is not provided for now, it likely never will be built. The preclusion of the practical Elmhurst Street extension by the development will result in a lost opportunity to improve the Triangle street system efficiency. The Elmhurst extension would increase utilization of the future Southwest Corridor project, complete an additional Triangle east-west corridor, and reduce traffic congestion at the intersection of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street. Before turning to our request, it is worth pausing to note the Martin family's long history in Tigard. The Martins currently own Tax Lots 100, 401, 101 and 200 on the attached map, attached as Exhibit 1, but much of the surrounding area was once part of their farm, which encompassed over 27 acres until 2003. The Martins have watched and participated in the development of this area and would like to see it continue, but want to see it done correctly. Developing the property correctly means recognizing the site's critical location and its obligations to its neighbors. In 2015, the City completed the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan (the "Triangle Strategic Plan"), which was intended to be a "blueprint" for the future development of the Triangle. In addition, in December 2016, the City Council approved the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (the "Triangle UR Plan") and sent it to the voters of the City. The Triangle UR Plan is a document that, among other things, identifies the critical public street system investments the City intends to make in the area. Although those Plans have not been adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan, they are the City's most recent review of the needs of the Triangle and statements of what is needed. Those plans contain several important projects that are implicated by the proposed development. The Triangle UR Plan includes as one of its primary projects the extension of 741h Avenue south from 99W to Hermoso Way or Beveland Road. See Exhibit 2, excerpt from Triangle UR Plan (highlighted Project No.2). This urban renewal project will be located directly to the west of the proposed development and will be a key link for the future residents and patrons of the Triangle to the proposed Southwest Corridor bridge over Highway 217. More importantly for the proposed project, the Triangle Strategic Plan includes a new local street extending SW Elmhurst Street from SW 72i1 Avenue to the new SW 74"Avenue. See Exhibit 3, excerpt from Triangle Strategic Plan. Although these two plans do not contain criteria that are directly applicable to this proposal, those plans must inform the Council's decision on this matter. Tigard City Council January 30, 2017 Page 3 The directly applicable criteria comes from the City's Community Development Code ("CDC") and CDC 18.620.020 directly addresses the location of new streets. That provision, governing "street connectivity," requires every development to demonstrate how it will meet one of two standard options for connectivity. The Planning Commission's decision found that the proposed development met the "Design" option,2 but the Planning Commission is wrong. The "design option" requires any development to meet the following requirements: "1. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. "2. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of- way shall be provided at intervals of no more than 330 feet." The Planning Commission's final decision notes that the distance between SW Dartmouth Street and the next street to the south, SW Hermoso Way, is approximately 930 feet, "which exceeds the 660-foot maximum street spacing standard." The decision notes that good street design would "extend SW Elmhurst across 72nd," but does not require such an extension and, because all connections identified by the applicant are impractical, the proposed design does not meet the code. The acceptance of impractical designs is harmful to adjacent property, the Triangle, and City. The decision is not clear why this proposal is not required to demonstrate how it will meet the code and use "good street design," but provides two possible explanations. First, the decision notes that there are "extenuating circumstances" that might preclude a through connection, including limited site distance along SW 72nd Avenue and existing development. However, the City code identifies how to handle extenuating circumstances such as this; CDC 18.620.020 authorizes an applicant to seek a variance where topography or other barriers exist, but the applicant did not seek a variance and the Planning Commission did not grant a variance, so those extenuating circumstances cannot be the basis to ignore this criterion. 2 The applicant suggested in its application that it could also meet the"performance"option,but because that was not the basis for the approval, it will not be addressed further here. Tigard City Council January 30, 2017 Page 4 Alternatively, the decision notes the following: "The Concept Future Street Plan (Sheet C400) shows how this connection could be made consistent with the March 2015 Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan Street Network and Design Classification Preferred Option (non-regulatory). Since the subject site extends 400 feet south of SW Dartmouth, the extension of Elmhurst at 72nd Avenue is not required in connection with this application. However, given the site topography, the more feasible connection to the Walmart site appears to cross a portion of the subject site toward the west in alignment with the Walmart parking lot drive aisle. To the extent the extension shown on the plans is feasible and is not precluded by the proposed development, this standard is met." A copy of the "Concept Future Street Plan" is attached to this letter as Exhibit 4. There are multiple problems with this conclusion that have been discussed in our communication with the Planning Commission, but this letter will discuss only our primary concern, which is that 18.620.020.A.1 is expressly dependent on the extension being "feasible." However, as presented at length to the Planning Commission, the "concept" future street plan is impractical and not reasonably feasible, nor is being merely "feasible" sufficient to meet this code. The slopes are too steep and long, the remaining developable land is negligible, and there is a substantial development in the path of the street. It simply is impractical and not reasonably feasible to build the connection identified in Concept Future Street Plan shown on sheet C400 and the Planning Commission erred in finding otherwise.3 The applicant failed to demonstrate how it will meet the design option because it used impractical future street plans instead of the practical and least impactful Elmhurst Street extension. Notwithstanding the issues identified above, the situation is solvable. Attached as Exhibits 5 and 6 to this letter are two approaches that show the implementation of a street plan that is not impractical, the least impactful, reasonably feasible, buildable, is consistent with CDC 18.620.020 and other street design codes, as well as the Triangle UR Plan and the Triangle Strategic Plan. Both exhibits would require some changes to the application as submitted, but those changes are not extensive. The Elmhurst extension as shown in Exhibits 5 and 6 provides a 3 Later in the process,the applicant submitted an alternative sheet C400, labelled the"Pedestrian&Vehicular Access Connectivity Plan." To the extent the Planning Commission was relying on this alternate sheet C400 to show street connectivity,it also fails because it does not actually create a"street,"but a parking lot aisle. Tigard City Council January 30, 2017 Page 5 workable solution that meets all applicable street connectivity criteria. Exhibit 5 requires only some minor re-configurations of the applicant's plan. Exhibit 6 uses a small portion of the adjacent land— also owned by the applicant— to maintain the same number of parking spaces, and only requires a small portion of the main parking lot to be reconfigured. Alternatively, the size of the development can be reduced to provide for the required street connection. Conclusion As noted above, Mr. Martin has a long-standing interest in the development of this area and wants to see the applicant develop its property. However, crucial to the development of this area is the obligation that all parties provide their share of the common infrastructure. Allowing the applicant to build this development without providing for the required street connectivity would harm the entire Triangle. The proposed development would needlessly and permanently preclude an east- west street connection vital to the Triangle's future street system because the proposed future street plans of the applicant are all impractical and will not be built. Unless provisions for a practical Elmhurst Street Extension are required now, a significant opportunity to improve the Triangle street system efficiency will be permanently lost. Accordingly, Mr. Martin urges the Council to either approve this application with a condition to re-configure the development consistent with Exhibit 5 or 6, or remand it to the Planning Commission so that the Commission can review and revise its decision in accordance with the goal of providing for a practical Elmhurst Street extension. We appreciate your service to the community and attention to this appeal. Very truly, yours, Bill Kabeiseman BK:kms Enclosures IN p CO k HJ a wf».IN Mtt. ,.w� t« gal �n K if z C VJ cl- k t; rM F: MIA, � y o „$.., cd t Iry F ``. IGU .N� •uf � � i fMInN � SI IHI��r[ _—IM 3AN-- k — y IL60l U]I m,.uu fec..ut k ruuu r .►,i . r II f � y rL�fi J I Milo X I left O ax Y.V Qi 8 r C �ffr, • � j •�fn i yy •flr.Fp,. i � II tr• � 1 1 Y 1 i •fw tllt W I { EXHIBIT 1 IV. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT CATEGORIES As an outcome of the goals described in the previous section, the projects within the Area fall into the following categories: • Transportation (Goal 2) • Public Utilities (Goal 3) • Public Spaces, Facilities,and Installations (Goal 4) • Re/Development Assistance and Partnerships (Goal 5) • Finance Fees and Plan Administration V. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS Urban renewal projects authorized by the Plan are described below. A. Transportation The following transportation projects are intended to provide a safe and effective multimodal transportation network in the Area that supports mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented development through improved internal connectivity, external access, and mobility; a variety of travel options; comfortable, interesting, and attractive streetscapes; and,well-managed parking options. Table 1 —Transportation Projects W 1 New Hwy 217 Overpass Extend Beveland Rd south over Hwy 217 to Hunziker (Beveland) Rd/Wall St area with car,ped,and bike facilities. 2 New Street Extend 74th Ave south from 99W to Hermoso Way or (74th Ave) Beveland Rd. 3 New Street Extend Atlanta St west from 69th Ave to Dartmouth St or (Atlanta) future 74th Ave. 4 New Hwy 1-5 Overpass Provide ped/bike bridge across Hwy I-5 from Beveland Rd (Beveland) to Southwood Dr. New Hwy 1-5 Overpass Provide ped/bike bridge across Hwy 1-5 between the 5 (Red Rock Creek) Triangle and PCC Sylvania around location of Red Rock Creek. 6 Modified intersection Install traffic signal and turn lanes where needed at Atlanta (Atlanta/68th) St/68th Ave intersection. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 9 EXHIBIT 2 11111UMA a 1 177 Modified Intersection Add protected left turn and transit improvements on 68th (99 W/68th) Pkwy at 99W. Develop comfortable, interesting,and attractive streetscapes 8 Modified Streets throughout the Area,especially along designated pedestrian streets. 9 New Trail Build a new trail along Red Rock Creek parallel to and (Red Rock Creek) south of 99W. 10 New Streets Improve connectivity,circulation,and access throughout the Area with new or extended local streets. Modified Street TBD. Improve 72nd Ave corridor, including I I (72nd Ave) intersections/interchanges.Dependent on 72nd Ave Corridor Study recommendations. Modified Street Implement access management strategies and median 12 (99W) projects in Hwy 99W Plan, including additional pedestrian crossing locations. 13 Modified Interchange Add second left turn lane on Hwy 217 northbound ramp to (99W/Hwy 217) 99W. 14 Modified Signals Upgrade signals throughout the Area with adaptive signal coordination technology. 15 Parking Management Plan Develop a plan and implement strategies for managing parking. Periodically evaluate the functioning of the transportation 16 Transportation Study system to refine project scope and inform project prioritization. B. Public Utilities The following public utility protects are intended to address infrastructure deficiencies in the Area. This list includes the development of a stormwater master plan for the Area and a greenway plan for Red Rock Creek that addresses stormwater, sewer,and recreational needs. It also includes construction of new stormwater facilities, repair of existing sewer lines, and extension or enlargement of existing water and sewer lines as needed to support desired development. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan 10 EXHIBIT 2 FIGURE 13 Tigard Triangle S1 AAlf(,IC PLAN swlrnccrsr W........ SWS"VCI ST .,Ooe SWPrANIFES, u.mc to sw6Rlh to =Ibiory lot SWARANfA5 5W".ORST swlnllrrtvewsr swcwroNsr I/ ........... ........... swfiourmtooboft 1WO&aAOj SWAUNLAET LEGEND Existing features dw-Rmssr giggigggign freeways Roads and streets' Proposed Improvements Neighborhood Route UVROW) SWFWSY Local Street(60'ROW) &VOWsr 1,11ghwayc(ossIng(multin"al) swraRloop 111cycleMedestrian[totting 0 300 800 Nl r l I FOOL WC—Rv&I St .1—C—WIROR EXHIBIT 3 wn.ra ru uu a>nnx r+a,aesuon wmn�v+nu n� • rte'--�--------�------- : -J�-LJ-. -�=-- """r,^.T �--- — v v.0s L� -y,< r F , im r J tq— r � k^^ o; ,, , --------------------------- I� f � � ,1 I.• I� , , I r ' 1 N � E g m G nd v L b it ai TRIANGLE MEDICALw y �C CONCEPT FUTURE STREET t IGA � PLAN OFFICE BUILDING RD OREGON t.aswa•tuwa.a•n.rvnu n,wunu, `�F sroera.rwnna-woctu[ancrn,cr�F� ! Building Parking Buitd ng TAX LOT 100 el SITE PLAN MOVED NORTH-14 feet } f `J \ f f Wetland Fitted. rr ,J � J I� � f J��J�w _ / � r Building:36.000 SF Total T ( (1 f 169 Parking Stalls Without Elmhurst 4.7 Per 1000 SF t I, ��-' -.";a 1 l J t r // Pedestrian Bridge / f "+' w -�..ir �,i / ✓ �r from 72nd Sidewalk 157 Parking Stalls WITH Elmhurst �` �/ �-' /�rte. r! r ` �1 to a Possibly raised 4.4 Per 1000 SF f / y /f f'.r /��'j / building area to fit ! i sloped site better,or 2-story building. ,-Story J J %✓ 4.200 SF 7 J/ 'yJa t�L/// J , (Possibly raised or 2 Stay) tj b - -LL � . J TAX OT X01 '>�i t 1 y �a trr s t� �'�o�'�` ��) � �✓ �l � r / �....G r.✓ �. I r SITE PLAN-OPTION n TIGARD ONCOLOGY n scALe r.sa nECfiXMW a,m+s TIGARO,OREGON 0 126 ZS 50' / • /rchitects,Iic • ; 7�,i";.' ;T—'F=i� +E:+ "�-;�-}-�;--- - ?-` ��_s•L'9t�eo,�,!Jy�,^,:� ��� c :`{ t ' tv ' r Y(kSlED PI-ERIE. Y_, ` AAY_ .rn,lc TRADE RtT 7-�.�_` �•+I i -/El - i J '� �' �F, �•__ //�� / y i .�'r• ,i•�' / X019 "SL PRINT ia TYPV EX AD Ielturts J I. ` : • r f=, --�— '. i 1 z�_�-�i J i' i i i I' Ra1k t }r 1f��1. / imp LX SM(8 r Y jj au: I83Ed , I' ,�{ ,.-,_7�yMJ�/( '��f j//��" � j •— / , r—"�`, a �, �► IE rk I76.93(8-E) r" ✓ / / �/ r op=any IE wl-gailM'(�'Rj „' � / ! �/ ���/j l/ rte• j/// //�. .r•�- 91 .iPLOYEE PARKING PRIMSRILY IN •� a EAST CORNER OF 713DO REPLACES '. SHADEDOF AREAINDICATESEXTENSION �H.I7 •,. _� - - i ON OF FU.1HU0.5T FJ(TENSIGN NOT �•f 11191 � T '4 a;:- LL STALLS LOST BY STREET. NYMLICTED AS PART OF E4ELOPMEM. � - 1. 94J}S:Gr. i N _a' t - 'j 1L 401 j i TL 4W 3'a r j- - , ' Ms TLVX ME OWNERASEL-NH•iURST ST �l J Ex slv / fT1 i , 1 E It.(IY - -- X 1E AL2 __�--- r-ba corssraucT,on, 1 TIGARD OR ALTERNATE EAST-WEST 2:L•. :pPP-1 CONNECTION - PLAN SUPPLEM N` AL QAC FOR Y.##� . ' 41 City of Tigard (DATE OF METING) Memorandum im '"Wom To: Mayor Cook, and City Councilors From: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner Re: Public Hearing for Appeal of Planning Commission Decision, Final Order No. 2016-011, to Approve Triangle Medical Office PDR2016-0001 1/SDR2016-00007 -Supplemental Findings. Date: February 7, 2017 Supplemental Findings: 18.620 Tigard Triangle Plan District 18.620 Street Connectivity,Design Option 18.620.020.A.1 Local street spacing shall provide public street connection at intervals of no more than 660 feet. Given the street layout in the Tigard Triangle, the local street spacing standard would require a new public street extension of SW Elmhurst Street west of SW 72nd in the vicinity of the subject site. Even though the subject site does not include the 72nd Street frontage where SW Elmhurst would be extended, it would be possible, given the topography of the area west of 72nd, that an extension alignment could affect the subject property downslope. However, in this case, extension of SW Elmhurst is exempt from the local street spacing standard because of the existing Walmart development to the west (18.810.030.H.1). Walmart is a recent development that is served by private access aisles within its parking lot without the opportunity for a public street to connect to and which is unlikely to redevelop anytime soon. Notwithstanding the exemption, the applicant has explored the extension of a public street, at the request of City staff, to identify a feasible extension that might serve the City's plans for increased connectivity in the future associated with the provisional Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan (2015). The applicant's Concept Future Street Plan (Sheet C400) and the Concept Future Street Profile (Sheet C401) demonstrate that the proposed alignment is feasible and is not precluded by the proposed Triangle Medical Office development (18.810.030.H.2), i.e., the land is not topographically constrained because the maximum slope is less than 15 percent (14.56 percent) for a distance of less than 250 feet (196 feet). A 3k L. / f � ' f ` I�i■unnnu� Ci ■ 71 rri C3 I/ riu•■n i ■ w ■ ■ • � i���� iii • i ` i ■ ,PO ■ f ® I iie r� M i ■ r r • w w e r a w s r w _ w SW 72ND AVENUE 1 cn * F IM ch cn T M: W cii > O oo0 j m O 1-- m N + N I EXIC,TING HOME di (n U EXIST NG GRADE PROFILE PER SURVEY > C> Un o u-i N W N c.) > m m i G GRADE PROFILE PER METRO GIS i N e Q CC w cc / � Z / Q / WLM (/) C7 J STA:2+60.0 K:15.23 LVC:100.00 0 0 0 0 o 3 0 N M W op U W W 195.9' 11.060 1 7140 !17110 VICINITY MAP PDR2016-00011 f-,—m 7SDR2016-00007 Triang 7255 le Medical Office A- I 14 C9 A J- 4-945 Building c, 119qj4j55 mj-ff11q9 45 ,44"r 11945 ;;jj vw9ff9 I bb A S )" 11945 lw—T-pro, 75 0 75010 7500Of 07500 136 2 Subject Site 142-, 12023 -"7168 f j F 'M H U IRS S1 - 45 71 100 7070 L Approx.Scale 1:2,000-1 in 167 ft UL Map printed at 07:33 AM oIT 01-Sep-16 ,12280 Dmewn IM D—�M S— DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIKE SOURCES ME CITY OF TIGARD III.- MMES NO WARRANTY,REPRESENTATION OR WMMTEE AS TO THE CONTENT,�CURACY,TIMELINESS ON COMPLETENESS OF MY OF 35 A DIED HEREIN.THE CITY OF TL�O S�ASSUME NO -I LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS,OMISSIONS.OR INACCURAOES IN THE 95 i 7355 33 Will—11" INFORMATION PROVED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUIiiED. 7315 -5 z city Of Tigard Mims 13125S 4-�m�4 1' . 00 TIGARD lg.".- a"131vil Feet M ( 1 4 0"7223 Ally 300 'APS Ica m 503 639-4171 ■ D32 - www.tigard-or.gov TIF 12 � 1 COMPASS ONCOLOGY SW 72ND AVENUE AND SW DARTMOUTH STREET lilt Ito C, . � . - - seDRwc E?TO FE BUIi t Il � OPOSM ROAD •p Q 1 rU TO cc I Z 11 I rJ e 1,K..,d T.Kk Port \ C-- i S—M.,T V-1 <r Pe _ \I nidl Tnn...nu r"� M.,,A—W rnm,WO, wR Cf'MJ' f i.nia¢.'P�nu Pact Poen Tigard Triangle Street Plan OfN.T T,,J n"' Urban Design Concept P,,.n•.I R—,1:,a•.. O Tigard Triangle Street Plan I-IRWd Irfawe Ptwf P140*1 IRR.n-Ir .4A update:2114 nowe Plat Wm*t 14620-r1 O'l-PAf�Y/I I KIK /r/architects, Ilc a 9 40 oUQ PROPOSED ROAD YET TO BE BUILT k p'p C ofl p ' O 60'R. D. n ool Q O � �`Q P p 9S n �� nam a •' 0 0 f °oqq NO ROADS PROPOSED PROPOSED ROAD a Qa YET TO BE BUILT XP e' v Q o0 oda . PROPOSED ROAD COMPLETED OD I • KIK /4parchitects, 11c f7 ♦ n CD n T i II A C3 ,. i _fig I I ° C3 wr it b I � p o �i o a 3 TRIANGLE MEDICAL se CONCEPT FUTURE STREET OFFICE BUILDING s - _ � PLAN TIGARD OREGON ,� C7 ♦ r+ n n a�� B^' 8 � i fi° F z i u 1 i t � F e � 2 �$ e b Mb pp s�R TI. r=gym aI q A�II �I sr rt o II z � n _ s CONCEPT FUTURE STREET TRIANGLE MEDICAL t PROFILE OFFICE BUILDING 16 1 _ �112ARD OREGON , l n ♦ r+ n � a ij \ K F Lt a r i a V I V 1 � - • 'e s� .l i� n CONCEPT FUTURE STREET TRIANGLE MEDICAL PROFILE PRIOR TO OFFICE BUILDING _ lama WALMART TIGARD OREGON q� ^'"""•d"" CDMECT TO EIDSIN S10BM ORAIN SYSTEM VA AKE wD�I�PUBIIC TAX LOT 300 ACCESS EA 1 TAX MAP 2S101BA {V 1 17, 177 26 PUBIC I -------- ACCESS ACCESS EASDENT -1 i + 1 1 T 401 TAX MAP MAP L 15PUBLIC W 1 W ! TAX LOT 400 FAX wAP 2S101BA I TAX LOT w —TAX MAP 2S10 SW ELMFiURST STREET DATE 10/31/2016 CONCEPT OFFSITE DEVELOPMENT/PEDESTRIAN WAY/ EXMBIT PUBLIC STORM DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE k- = 60 FEET TBMNGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING LLC 12M SM fE1 O RIX STE 100a«P EO 0 24 M b m TUALAT64 OR 87062 u'S J(IB 8503.503.6151F-.505636152 ub-� cm 4762 IQ.BI>1NIY1 ON[rr./mn r urn IIM Ierw nl M olmlm KIK /�'Parchitects, Ilc IR Renderings - - ---- ..... rnpass kson— ` y 11 I�� ����I� I��I�t( ■{I � � 'f^ �i+ Renderings 'li;_�, �" � ice`r• r ����'. .• �: iii�l� ` ii�YY`�,y!'' ,; _ It A Renderings To'; NNW I I AKS Engineering and Forestry, LLC. AK architects, Ilc \Z3. \ N ti / r / / Y i 480' I i � ------------------- , i I 600.00 - 600' NO INTERSE , o °oo SECTION 18.705.( - -- - o DEVELOPMENT CC I � ------- ---- ------� - -- -- 300' 300 'NO INTER -- - - -—� SECTION D.2 Cl I IMPROVEMENTAl [ r OVERLAPPING NO INTERSECTION ZONE SW ELMHU"TSTRIEET PTJ Uj cd _ > qJ Z 300' — Z C7 141 Supplemental Packet for: 2/717, Item #8 PF'RKI NS COIE? 1120 NW Couch Street O +1.503.717.2000 10th Floor © +1.503.727.2222 Pont",OR 97209-6129 PerkinsCoie.com February 7,2017 Dana L.Krawczuk DKrawczuk®perkinscoie.com VIA EMAIL D. +1.503.727.2036 F. +1.503.346.2036 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Base Camp I, LLC's Response to Appeal of Triangle Medical Office (Final Order No. 2016-11, PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007) Dear Mayor Cook and Members of City Council: We represent Base Camp I, LLC ("Base Camp"), the applicant for a comprehensive cancer treatment center(the "Project") located at the corner of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue, on Tax Lot 300(the"Site"). Please include this testimony in the record. We respectfully request that the City Council reject the appeal and approve the Project this evening. The Project has been analyzed by City staff for over a year, was considered by the Planning Commission at three public hearings,who approved the Project unanimously. The Project will provide state of the art outpatient cancer treatments for patients in an attractive, comfortable and convenient environment, while also providing 80 high paying jobs, including 12 oncologists. The only issue on appeal is the neighboring property owner's, Gordon R. Martin, Trustee of the Tri-County Center Trust ("Martin"),desire to have Base Camp construct an extension of SW Elmhurst as a public street across the Site. Martin's property value,particularly if redeveloped, will be significantly increased if the road installed at the expense of Base Camp and physically located off of Martin's property. Base Camp and its consultants have met with Martin in an effort to find a mutually agreeable extension of SW Elmhurst. Our understanding from that meeting was that Martin has no redevelopment plans at this time, and was resistant to any development on the Site that may impact Martin's unknown future development options. We believe that the engineered conceptual future street plans and applicable code provisions make that concern unfounded. The only relevant considerations for City Council in determining this single issue are: (1) identifying the applicable approval criteria; and(2) applying those criteria to the Project. No section of the Code or other binding or applicable plan or study depicts a road across the Site. The applicable engineering and design standards prohibit a street connection along the Site's frontage on SW 72nd Avenue and the Site does not have frontage on SW Dartmouth Street. See Attachment A, Analysis of Conceptual Street Alignments, AKS Engineering(2/7/17). Moreover, 134371023.2 Perkins Cae LLP Mayor Cook and City Councilors City of Tigard February 6, 2017 Page 2 requiring the Project to install a public street across the Site has no nexus to the impacts of the Project and would be disproportional to the Project's impacts. Although a street is not required, Base Camp voluntarily provided a conceptual future street plan that demonstrates that if the City determines in the future that a road connection in the vicinity of the Site is appropriate, the Project does not preclude that connection. See AKS Engineering's February 7,2017 memo(Attachment B) and the Conceptual Future Street Plans and Profiles (collectively, the"conceptual future street plan") Exhibits 1-4 of Attachment B, which were prepared by a licensed civil engineer. It is relevant to note that one of the conceptual future street plan alignments shows a connection to SW 74'h Avenue, which is not included on any adopted street plan and was not required when Walmart was developed. The City's engineering staff,planning staff and Planning Commission all agree that conceptual future street plan demonstrates that the Project does not preclude a future connection. No licensed engineer or other qualified expert has offered testimony or evidence contradicting that conclusion. However, because the conceptual future street plan is not necessary to demonstrate compliance with any approval criteria, it is not the basis for an appeal or for the City Council's decision on the Project. Much of Martin's testimony focuses on his preferred road alignment and the conceptual future street plan. Martin's arguments are irrelevant and should be disregarded. The applicable criteria do not require a road across the Site or the conceptual street plan, so whether Martin believes a particular alignment is more practical or more feasible has nothing to do with the Project's compliance with the approval criteria. Moreover, Martin's preferred alignments(Exhibits 5 and 6 to Martin's January 30,2017 testimony)do not meet the City's engineering standards, and the proposal on Exhibit 5 impacts the natural resource buffer area. See Attachment B, AKS Engineering's February 7, 2017 memo. Applicable Approval Criteria The only standards and criteria that apply to the Project are the applicable standards in the Tigard Community Development Code("TDC"or"Code")which were effective on the date the application was submitted. ORS 227.178(3). The criterion at issue in this appeal is TDC 18.620.020 "Street Connectivity"which, as relevant here, provides: "18.620.020 Street Connectivity "Demonstration of standards. All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per 134371023.2 Perkins Coe LLP Mayor Cook and City Councilors City of Tigard February 6, 2017 Page 3 the requirements of Section 18.370.010 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. "A. Design option. 661. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet." This criterion requires the City to consider whether a public street connection across the Site is appropriate so that a street connection at an interval of up to 660 feet is provided. Street improvement standards in the Code,adopted street plans and adopted engineering and design standards are the basis for determining the location of the intersection and alignment of a street, which determines whether a street is required across the Site. A street improvement must also be directly related and roughly proportional to the impact of the Project. TDC 18.620.010(B). Materials that are Not Applicable The Transportation System Plan, Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan,Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan, and Southwest Corridor project are not applicable to the Project, and cannot be the basis for findings,conditions or the final decision on the Project. Therefore,testimony directed at or based upon these documents should be disregarded. The Project's Compliance with the Applicable Approval Criteria The Site's only frontage is on SW 72nd Avenue. The adopted Tigard Triangle Street Plan (Attachment C) does not show a street the Site. Additionally,no extensions of SW Elmhurst or SW 74`h Avenue are included on the adopted street plan. The TSP does not include an extension of SW Elmhurst or SW 74`h Avenue. The Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan("TTSP")has not been adopted by the City, does not have a binding street plan,and includes only possible future revisions to the Code and TSP. The City's lean code,which is currently being drafted to implement the TTSP does not include the SW Elmhurst Street extension. Instead, SW Elmhurst is shown as a pedestrian connection, which the Project has provided. Because there is no road on the adopted street plan,the required location of a potential future street connection must align with and continue SW Elmhurst Road(which is located approximately 560 feet from the intersection of Dartmouth and SW 72nd). TDC 18.810.030.D.2.a. This intersection alignment is not on the Site. Moreover, aligning the SW Elmhurst extension intersection so that it is on the Site does not comply with applicable engineering and design standards, as depicted on Exhibit A, Public Street Intersection Plan, AKS Engineering(February 7, 2017). Our previous testimony explains why requiring a street 134371023.2 Pe or.Coe LLP Mayor Cook and City Councilors City of Tigard February 6, 2017 Page 4 alignment that crosses the Project Site is not roughly proportional to the impacts of the Project.' For all of these reasons, TDC 18.620.020 does not require a road across the Site. Nothing further is required for the Project. No variance is needed. The approved Project complies with TDC 18.620.020. This outcome is consistent with how the City has previously applied the Code. The Walmart that is adjacent to the Site was not required to install or make any accommodations for an extension of SW 740i Avenue or connection with SW Elmhurst. This is because SW 74th Avenue is not required by the Code and is not shown on any applicable street plan. Any objection to the Project based upon SW 74th Avenue is irrelevant. Voluntary Conceptual Future Street Plan If and when Tax Lots 400/401 and/or Martin's property develops, the City will apply TDC 18.620.020 and 18.810.030.H.2 to the applications and determine whether or not an extension of SW Elmhurst will be required. At that time the City will consider potential road extension constraints, such as topography. In anticipation of future nearby development, Base Camp voluntarily provided a conceptual future street plan to show that a future Elmhurst extension, if required, was not precluded by the Project. The conceptual future street alignments(Attachment B, Exhibits 1-4) were prepared by a licensed civil engineer and include three options: (1)a connection to the existing Walmart parking lot(Ex. 2); (2) a connection to an assumed grade and location of SW 74th Avenue(which is not on any adopted street plan)(Ex. 3); and (3)connectivity through internal parking lot connections(Ex. 4). Martin's testimony focuses on the conceptual future street plan, and advocates for a different alignment. Because the conceptual future street plan is not necessary to demonstrate compliance with any approval criteria, it is not the basis for an appeal or for the City Council's decision on the Project. Even if the conceptual future street alignment was relevant to the approval, and TDC 18.810.030.H.2 did apply to the Project, we have demonstrated that the alternative conceptual future street plans do not preclude a future extension of SW Elmhurst. No expert evidence or legal argument that is consistent with the Code have demonstrated that an,extension of SW Elmhurst is precluded by the Project. The conceptual future street alignments profiled on Exhibits 2, 3 and 4 comply with the City's grade standards, and do not impact environmental resources. The existing home is assumed to ' In addition to the lack of transportation impact that would warrant a road improvement,Base Camp's predecessor in interest paid S 195,506 toward the Dartmouth Street Improvement Assessment,which enhanced the traffic capacity and connectivity in the area. 134371023.2 Perim Coe LLP Mayor Cook and City Councilors City of Tigard February 6, 2017 Page 5 be removed for redevelopment as a prerequisite for extending the street because the street would not be extended across Martin's property until such time as it is redeveloped. Martin's testimony discusses whether or not the street connections in the conceptual future street plan are practical or reasonably feasible, but"practical" and"reasonably feasible" are not an applicable standards. An extension of SW Elmhurst, if required in the future,will be required unless it is"precluded"by identified constraints, and the Code defines"precluded"by explaining that"a street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions." TDC 18.810.030.H.2. "Practicality"or"reasonable feasible"are not the standards. Martin's preferred alternative alignments do not meet design and engineering standards. See Attachment B. By comparison, Base Camp's conceptual future street plan was prepared by a licensed civil engineer, and the City's engineering staff, planning staff and Planning Commission all agree that conceptual street plan demonstrates that the Project does not preclude a future connection. No licensed engineer has offered testimony or evidence contradicting that conclusion. Conclusion The Project complies with all of the applicable approval criteria. There is no legal or evidentiary basis to modify Planning Commission's unanimous approval of the Project. We respectfully request that the City Council reject the appeal and approve the Project at its February 2, 2017 hearing. Very truly yours, c.JC ollt - 64 Dana L. Krawczuk Enclosures: Attachment A: Public Street Intersection Plan,AKS Engineering(2/7/17) Attachment B: AKS Engineering's 2/7/17 memo,which includes: Exhibit 1 —Conceptual Future Street Plan Exhibit 2-Conceptual Future Street Profile Exhibit 3 -Conceptual Future Street Profile Prior to Walmart Exhibit 4 — Conceptual Offsite Development/Pedestrian Way/Public Storm Drainage Plan Attachment C—Adopted Tigard Triangle Street Plan 134371023.2 Perk core LLP I aw I 4W _ - I I 600•00'-600' NO INTERSECTION ZONE PER SECTION 18.705.M CITY OF TIGARD i DEVELOPMENT CODE I I ° 300' 300'NO INTERSECTION ZONE PER SECTION D.2 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS OVERLAPPING NO INTERS-CTION ZONE EET ATTACHMENT A — DATE 2/7/20`17 — PUBLIC STREET INTERSECTION SPACING PLAN DHBIT TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING A SCALE i" = 100 _ AKS ENGINEERING k FORESTRY, LLC Wft Cm ~ _too _ I 12965 SIN HERMAN RD. STE 100 A% D,.rxCEG 0 r0 eo e0 100 7 TUALATIN,OR 97062 rocs JOB: �— I P:503.563.6151 F:503.563.6152 oks-en .com 4762 NO ao PAC SW wr I MA WN=RN OSI TUALATIN VANCOUVER SALEM-KE{ZER A� W-17-11 I 12965 S W HERMAN R0..SUrit 100 -TUALATIN.OR 97062 P:150315638151 F!15031 5636152 EN61NtLRING&FORESTRY Feburary 7, 2017 Gary Pagenstecher,AICP CUD Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Triangle Medical Office Building- PDR2016-00011/SDR2016-00007 Dear Mr. Pagenstecher: Thank you again for your time in discussing our project and assisting us in making this project,one that helps make the Tigard Community a better one to live in.This letter and attached documents have been prepared to provide additional materials supporting our application, and in response to Mr. Kabeiseman's letter dated January 30,2017. Please incorporate this supplemental information into the record so that it may be considered at the February 7, 2017 City Council hearing. Exhibit S The Appellant proposed an alternate site plan depicted as "Exhibit 5" in the January 30,2017 Kabiesman letter. This sketch proposed shifting the building and parking area to the north by 14 feet,filling the wetlands, and reconfiguring the parking and building areas. In doing so,the Appellant claims that this provides room for their proposed alternate future street plan. This plan is not accurate nor feasible as described below: • Exhibit 5 does not show the full connection of the future street alignment to 72nd Avenue. If their proposal is the same as shown in Exhibit 6,this proposal is in violation of the City's Engineering Design Standards as described below and in further detail in responses regarding Exhibit 6: o The street alignment as proposed by the appellant does not meet the required minimum curve radii. The radius proposed for the curve at the southwest corner of the property is+/-45 feet.The minimum curve radius for a local street is 166 feet. Conclusion The proposed future road alignment in appellant's Exhibit 5 does not meet City standards. • Exhibit 5 relies on moving the building to the north 14 feet to provide room for their proposed future street.This is not feasible as described below: o This shift would put the building and parking within about 16 feet of the property line. As described in detail in responses regarding Exhibit 6 below,the right of way they show is only 30 feet wide where 60 feet is required for a public street. As such,the building and parking would have to shift an additional 30 feet to the north which would place the improvements over the property line. o The shift in the building and parking to accommodate the required 60-foot-wide right of way would remove all the existing wetlands and vegetated corridor on the property. This would require approvals from the Oregon Department of State Lands,the US Army ATTACHMENT B Corps of Engineers, and Clean Water Services(DSL/CORP/CWS).You can only get approvals if you can prove that avoidance is not possible and there are no other alternatives. Our site plan, unanimously approved by the Planning Commission provides such avoidance. Conclusion The proposed site plan and alternate street alignment in Exhibit 5 is misleading because it relies on the removal of natural resources that would not be permitted by DSL/CORP/CWS. The Kabeiseman Exhibit 5 proposal also creates a site plan that is not realistic because it extends improvements beyond the property lines, which is not permitted by City Building and Development codes. Exhibit 6 The Appellant proposed an alternate public street alignment.This alignment is depicted as"Exhibit 6- Alternate East-West Connection Plan Sheet PP-1" in the Kabeiseman letter. The street alignment as proposed does not meet the City of Tigard Engineering Department Public Improvement Design Standards or Community Development Code based on the following: • TDC Section 18.620.080 Street and Accessway Standards,Table 18.620.2 states: o The required right of way width for East-West Streets in the Triangle shall be 60 feet. Conclusion The width of the right of way proposed by the Appellant as measured in Exhibit 6 varies from+/-28 feet wide near the Walmart Driveway to+/-32 feet wide leading up to 72nd Avenue.As shown,this proposed right of way width is generally half of that required for a public street, does not meet standard and furthermore, misrepresents the amount of area needed to construct the road and thus impact to the approved development. • City of Tigard Engineering Department Public Improvement Design Standards Section D- Street and Road Requirements,Subsection 2 Horizontal Alignment states: Horizontal centerline alignments of improvements shall be parallel with the centerline of the right-of-way. Centerline of the proposed street extension shall be aligned with the existing street centerline. Horizontal curves shall meet the minimum radius requirements as shown in Table 0-1. Streets intersecting an arterial or collector street but not continuing through the arterial or collector street along the same horizontal alignment(i.e., a staggered or tee intersection)shall not be located within 300 feet of another street intersecting the opposite side of the arterial or collector street. Local street intersections shall have a minimum separation of not less than 125 feet. Intersection spacing shall be measured from the centerlines of the streets. • City of Tigard Engineering Department Public Improvement Design Standards Table D-1 Design Speed/Minimum Centerline Radius lists for a Design Speed of 25 MPH a Minimum Centerline Radius of 166'is required. (Note:25 mph is the lowest speed listed in the table.) KqTriangle Medical Office Building-City of Tigard February 7,2017 City Council Hearing—Supplemental Information Page 2 Conclusion The centerline radii of the right of way proposed by the Appellant as measured in Exhibit 6 is+/-45 feet for the curve at the southwest corner of the property and+/-75 feet for the two curves closest to 72nd Avenue. As shown,these proposed rights of way centerline radii are less than%2 to nearly%of the required centerline radii. Therefore, they do not meet standard and furthermore, misrepresents the amount of area needed to construct the road and thus impact to the approved development. Staff Questions Although not required,the approved application provided a Future Street Plan showing that a road could be constructed meeting all the applicable Community Development Code and Engineering Department Public Improvement Design Standards. In review of the AKS Future Street Plan,, Staff asked the following questions: Is the slope of the proposed alignment greater than 15%fora distance of 250 ft or more? Response: • No, neither profile exceeds 15%for any portion of the alignment(see Exhibits 1-3). • Conceptual Future Street Profile(Matching to current Walmart parking lot elevation)–The future street would have a maximum slope of 14.56%(less than the 15%allowed by Design Standards) and 196 feet would have a slope between 12%and 15%(no more than the 250 feet allowed by Design Standards) • Conceptual Future Street Profile Prior to Walmart (Matching to existing ground elevation prior to Walmart)-The future street would have a maximum slope of 11.55% none of which would be over 12% What is the %slope along the alignment? Response: • Conceptual Future Street Profile(Matching to current Walmart parking lot elevation)–The future street would slope from less than 2%to a maximum of 14.56%which is less than the 15% allowed • Conceptual Future Street Profile Prior to Walmart (Matching to existing ground elevation prior to Walmart)-The future street would slope from less than 2%to a maximum of 11.55%which is less than the 15°x6 allowed Bill[Kabiesman]says the land is topographically constrained and excavation greater than 20 ft is needed which leaves most of the land it is to cross through undevelopable—is this true? Response: • The City Engineering Design Standards and Community Development Code provide minimum and maximum design standards to ensure land adjacent to the roadways remain developable. Land in the Triangle has historically relied on large cuts and fills and retaining walls to level their sites for buildings and parking areas.There are many examples within a couple blocks of this site that are no different. What is proposed to be developed plays just as large a factor for the site design as grading does.Some sites have less challenges than others. AKr4 Triangle Medical Office Building-City of Tigard February 7,2017 Ammmunow City Council Hearing—Supplemental Information Page 3 What about the house blocking the proposed street—what is the City's response to that? Response: • As with most redevelopment sites, existing homes are often removed to make way for new projects. If the owner wants to save the home, then the road could curve to the north or to the south around the home. This is no different than the redevelopment of tax lots 400 and 402. The existing homes must be removed to develop new buildings and parking. Finally,the Applicant has attempted to work collaboratively with the appellant to develop mutually beneficial connectivity options, including coordinating and meeting with them and their representative. As part of that effort,our team provided an alternative connectivity plan,which presents internal access ways(both pedestrian and vehicular) in connecting parking lots as an efficient way to provide connectivity(see Exhibit 4). This by no means is the proposed development plan, rather a concept of how easily connectivity can be achieved when development was to occur. We will be available to answer any questions on these materials and findings at the February 7, 2017 City Council hearing.Thank you for your help on this matter. Sincerely, AKS ENG( d RI �G&" FORESTRY, LLC C _L . CS►r� Chuck Gregory, PE—A Attachments: • Exhibit 1—Conceptual Future Street Plan • Exhibit 2-Conceptual Future Street Profile • Exhibit 3-Conceptual Future Street Profile Prior to Walmart • Exhibit 4—Conceptual Offsite Development/Pedestrian Way/Public Storm Drainage Plan ^Kq Triangle Medical Office Building-City of Tigard February 7,2017 �� City Council Hearing—Supplemental Information Page 4 n awa.0 wn Hww s�,.0 n ac:v we:.o,mc•�ti-r awn•Zr i aV ' l ? A#l„�t' as awl ... .. ..? pr's ) !• d ' 1 ; •4 ....dd .. SW TMD AYEMUE , r r 1 7, i Is e lA I „ m ca 7r f �L , ID �y a � K q Mp E O + e Y TRIANGLE MEDICALn FUTURE STREE0- 4 T •rt a K c PLAN OFFICE BUILDING nxry < TIGARD OREGON F OSE swrnww rAruu1 R�opae w.C�lao Aasu,t w ^�y mall"RAMwG awst AIIcwicN e e\s No ww�r\atn a.n\rcNrft=.a�Laan wuR+w,r nou 4 P�� A a� 49 a Its ; a z a a \ I a \\ R \ R \ 1 1\ - 1 Y \1 1 lfx � l _ _"-_ a� 1 X r a a _2 co N n TRIANGLE MEDICAL �"'""`°""AVE c 4 N `\�� CONCEPT STREET OFFICE BUILDING xill ITIGARD OREGON fNf unfTNO YryRLL lElp/CtR 4 L.IA N.KlDi:41.n'Y w y"" fORfST9\0.fN1/14 LYfiRCYEIIACMRCiYIIf r Z9 Wz CC a t YC A LLI -i • I s'aC ttA TO 5/f!. Tr— 1 i{1 j-�.���feSY►JN 4C V nwwh� _I •• r n.•as �s4rK win W m rwtc o.M wm:w.Uw• — I.i I W LL LL � 0ra*c v.a wYu v■was .wt �p w ra F O r. taa�ar��an ae su . N cc W O ~ i:wo noun`` II CC S ECL Q II r :3 W -J r+wr�m.ma s r.src oe.o W J ?Q .we o www•ww:awv '- � dW lnsrq W CC iwwc w.m wur+F r nr,m o W U a wl 1h lwY 3��' f Z O 5 runar SMU7 wart[ } { U w +o' Scar ,•- 3T \ .wwcwr+waw 2.50 3:410 3.50 4.bo 4:SO - Jyc ,:•,r, r,..-. ::ui °° witr yy 6 I in WAM 4762 EXHIBIT 3 - C401 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM DRAW SYSTEM / l VARIABLE AMD PUBLIC TAX LOT 344 ACCESS EENT I — TAX MAP 2S101BA W t D d '-1 — _ III it I 1 `' N 26'PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT f I TAX LOT 1 TAX MAP 251016A STO15 RK PUBLIC EASEMENT !!! 1 \Y � TAX LOT 100 I \ _ ' TAX MAP 2SIO10A .4 --- ---------- �- TAX LOT 40 -*.TAX MAP 2S1 SW ELMHURST STREET .. 1 EXHIBIT 4 DATE:10/31/2016 CONCEPT OFFSRE DEVELOPMENT/PEDESTRIAN WAY/ EXHBIT I PUBLIC STORM DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE 1* = 60 FEET TRIANGLE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AKS ENGINEERING&FORESTRY.LLC mw CM I 12965 SW HERMAN RD. STE 100 IUALATII. OR 97062 AKS Joe so o z� x b 91) R..503.563.6151 F:503.563.6152 aks- cam 4762 Ont 4M iMgf1 0191[WeO1p11 11/MOT ISM I MANW1 94 NM n»T In 0 0 0 ° 00� Q L1 0 0 a'p Y 00 0 O 60'R.0. pt7�Doo p A 0 00 p Deme 0\ (1I)OT/j,lhux R O QQo ll �• :� 1 u °•00 r. 00 0000 G�QCOO,* 6 0otoC+p11 .. O a tP0 � r.r.a�araftr' "r 00 o ca 0.•� J u. 00 o ca I7 Q 09 �:O 0 l..cgcnd Major Arterial 1 r o Minor Arterial Local Collector �� , ``% �, Local Street Frontap Road +r�o ODOT Tool Box Potential Rotary locations O Tigard "Triangle Street Plan l i;urrl Triwigh,Plur►DkIrict — 18.620-12 AP P Uplute: 2/14 ATTACIDYIENT C as ra ti w e.was sra I wale®rrou�aye AKS Sheet C400 with Added Alternate Elmhurst Street Extensions SUPPLEMENTAL f ACKET FOR (DATE OF MEETING) E j Elmhurst Street Extension(RED) 1 ? Practical z '' Least impactful j More ADA friendly _ _----_----_—-- equitable street spacing j i equitable block design 1 J ! 8.5%Grade j l _ ' Meets Code Requirements 41, WAY it 1 I a J 1J, C3I '' 2 sfiR 1 amu` Equitable Bir- I Design I • 72ND AMUE Elmhurst Street Extension(BLACK) \ --- - -------- - i F Completely impractical " Elmhurst Street Extension(BLUE) Extremely impactful impractical--does not align with street I Not ADA friendly at all i Not impactful Poor street spacing !1 Not ADA friendly ! poor block design Excellent street spacing I z 15%Grade for over 250 feet 1 ;°a Good block design I Does not meet Code requirements Approx 10%Grade Does not meet Code requirements — 0 o m .mo'AK uc „� TRIANGLE MEDICAL •m- CONCEPT FUTURE STREET A c R PLAN OFFICE BUILDING �. TIGARD OREGON WOOM .. a. iavrarn.ruaucwva.acus,me AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: February 7,2017 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) - APPEAL TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2016-11, APPROVING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR 2016-00011) AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR 2016-00007) FOR A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ON A 3.76 ACRE SITE IN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT — SW OF THE INTERSECTION OF SW 72ND AVENUE AND SW DARTMOUTH STREET (Tax Map 2S101BA, Tax Lot 00300) PROPOSAL: Final order approving with conditions a land use application for a 36,000 square foot medical office building planned development and site development review on a 3.76-acre vacant parcel located southwest of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Proposed site improvements include a single-story building with surface parking taking access indirectly from SW Dartmouth through the adjacent Walmart development located in the Tigard Triangle Plan District. A pedestrian path is proposed through the site from SW 72nd to the Walmart parking lot. A vegetated corridor along the northern property line is partially protected, mitigated and improved. APELLANT: Bill Kabeiseman,Bateman Seidel Representing: Gordon R. Martin,Trustee of Tri-County Center Trust 888 SW 5th Avenue,Suite 1250 Portland,OR 97204 APPLICANT: Brian Bennett, Base Camp I,LLC 29080 SW Pete's Mountain Rd West Linn, OR 97068 Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony OWNER: Base Camp I,LLC 1399 Franklin Blvd Eugene, OR 97403 West Linn, OR 97068 LOCATION: Southwest of the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street;Washington County Tax Map/ Tax Lot# 2S101BA00300 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Zone: C-G:general commercial district;Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters—18.350, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: February 7, 2017 PLEASE PRINT Pr(,)(went—(Speaking In flavor O p x>ncnt—(Speaking Against Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,address&Phone No. \.uuc,address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phon ?o. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Addr &Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. W(irc-& I'honc No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AIS-2555 9. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Review of Hunziker Infrastructure Development Agreement Submitted By: Lloyd Purdy, Community Development Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Building upon a public/private partnership initiated in 2014, the City of Tigard can use a development agreement with TC Tigard LLC (Trammell Crow) to support the Hunziker Infrastructure Project and secure the developer's financial contribution to the project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Authorize the City Manager to sign the attached development agreement. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In April 2014, the City of Tigard's economic development team began working on a public/private partnership to support job creation, redevelopment, and new development in the Hunziker Core. This collaboration initially included the Fields Trust, owner of 42 acres along Wall Street (a private drive). The partnership grew to include Trammell Crow, the development firm seeking site control of 18 acres along Wall Street. As of 2016, Trammell Crow has yet to purchase the property from the Fields Trust. They expect to do so sometime before July 2017. Trammell Crow would like a signed development agreement with the City of Tigard before they purchase the property. The primary purpose of the development agreement is to secure the developer's contribution of at least $1.65 million for the $4.9 million Hunziker Infrastructure Project. This developer's contribution will be matched against $2.1 million in funding from the EDA and the majority of the $1.5 million appropriation from the State of Oregon for this project. In November, Trammell Crow asked for a change to the draft development agreement with a clause that allows them to delay its financial contribution to the project if land use approval conditions are found to be unacceptable. City of Tigard staff amended terms to include the option to create a local improvement district to secure the private sector funding needed for this project. Details of this local improvement district (LID) were discussed with council on January 10, 2017. This development agreement has been prepared by staff and the City Attorney. It outlines the roles, responsibilities, and expectations for a continued partnership with Trammell Crow in support of the Hunziker Infrastructure Project. If the City received a development application for this property from Trammell Crow, the City would condition the approval to require dedication and construction of a3/4 street improvement along the frontage with Wall Street. The developer prefers a full width street improvement. This project and agreement provide for both the city's and the developer's goals. The value of the contribution from Trammell Crow ($1,650,000) is less than our estimates of their cost to build a3/4 street improvement. The difference in expense is made up for via grant funding or reduced project scope. The Agreement provides for negotiations to reduce the scope of the project and/or cost sharing if construction costs exceed estimates, but also provides that the City's responsibility is limited to state and federal grant funds. Key to this public/partnership is the Hunziker Infrastructure Project which will ultimately connect Hunziker Road to 72nd Avenue via Tech Center Drive. This investment unlocks at least 40 acres of industrial and commercial zoned property for new development. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Initiate the project without Trammell Crow's funding commitment to the city with the expectation of reimbursement by Trammell Crow in the future. Allow Trammell Crow to build their 3/a street frontage improvement along Wall Street and then hire a construction firm to complete the unimproved portion of the street. This alternative conflicts with the EDA grant funding,which anticipates the City of Tigard building the whole project. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Infrastructure investment in the Hunziker Core is consistent with the City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan Goal 9 and the 2011 Economic Opportunity analysis. This infrastructure investment also supports the City's Strategic Vision Goal 2, Objective one and two that help "ensure development advances the vision" of a more walkable, interconnected, and healthier city. The use of grant funding for this investment also supports Goal four that seeks to fund the strategic vision without reducing core services. Strategic Vision Goal 2, Objective 1: Make best use of undeveloped and underdeveloped land to increase the value of the city. Strategic Vision Goal 2, Objective 2: Market Tigard, build a healthy business climate that attracts serves and employs more Tigard residents. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION January 10, 2017 LID discussion. October 18, 2016 First review of draft development agreement and review of EDA grant award. March 3, 2016: Discussion regarding Hunziker Infrastructure Project and progress on draft development agreement. December 15,, 2015: Review of 30% design and construction contract for Wall Street. September 22, 2015: Authorized staff to pursue $3 million in EDA funding for Wall Street construction connecting Hunziker and Tech Center Drive. June 16, 2015: Review of Trammell Crow's concept development scenarios at Wall Street. March 24, 2015: Economic Opportunity Analysis discussion. December 9, 2014: Pre-development update and presentation of draft MOU. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Information: Development agreement with Trammell Crow secures at least $1,650,000 in }private sector funding for the Hunziker Infrastructure Project, CIP 95047. State of Oregon funding of $1,500,000 and US Department of Commerce EDA funding of$2,080,000 is already committed. Attachments Hunziker DDA February 7,2017 Hunziker Infrastructure Development Agreement This Hunziker Infrastructure Development Agreement("Agreement")is entered into by and between the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation("City") and TC Tigard LLC, a Delaware limited liability company("Developer"). WHEREAS: 1. The parties agree that the area known as the Hunziker Industrial Core has the potential for improved value through substantial private sector investment that will promote increased economic activity and employment. This potential cannot be realized without a significant public and private investment in public infrastructure. The City has been working for more than two years on a strategy to improve public infrastructure in the Hunziker Industrial Core, and has created a plan to develop road, water and sewer infrastructure within the Hunziker Industrial Core. This plan is referred to as the "Hunziker Infrastructure Project". 2. City has determined that it is in the public interest to use public funds, including City funds and state and federal economic development grants,to provide partial funding for the public infrastructure necessary to spur private sector investment of this area. 3. City has determined that completion of the projects described below is necessary to accomplish the City's objectives consistent with the City of Tigard's Capital Improvement Plan. Three components of the Hunziker Infrastructure Project, are described below: Wall Street Improvements CIP 95047 ("Wall Street Project") Wall Street will be constructed from Hunziker Road to the existing Portland& Western Railroad "heavy tracks"to the southeast totaling 2,040 lineal feet of new public road. The paved width of the new road will be 46 feet with curb and gutter, 5 foot sidewalks on each side,bike lanes and storm water planter areas for water quality treatment within a 70-foot right-of-way transitioning to a paved width of 36 feet with curb and gutter, 5 foot sidewalks on one side, bike lanes and storm water planter areas for water quality treatment within a 50 foot right-of-way as the road approaches the heavy tracks. Within the new road alignment, an 8"sewer, 12"waterline and a 15" storm line will be placed to serve the adjacent properties.The Wall Street Project alignment, shown on Exhibit B, includes a looped water line connection to SW Tech Center Drive (3,475 linear feet). Wall Street Extension Project This is a planned future extension of Wall Street that will connect to SW Tech Center Drive. This is not part of this Agreement. East Tigard Sewer Replacement CIP 93013 ("East Tigard Sewer Project") This project is in the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan and involves increasing the capacity of an existing sanitary sewer line (serving the area north of Hunziker Street)to prevent overflows and to improve the access for routine maintenance. It will also provide sanitary sewer service for a portion of the undeveloped adjacent parcel (the Fields property). Clean Water Services (CWS)is funding the majority of this project. Page 1 of 13 4. City has obtained an appropriation from the State of Oregon Lottery Revenue Bond Capital Construction Fund in the amount of$1,500,000 (the "State Grant")to support"creating or improving public infrastructure in support of the Hunziker Infrastructure Project"which includes the Wall Street Project(part of this development agreement) as well as the Wall Street Extension project(not included as part of this development agreement). 5. City has been awarded a grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration(the"Federal Grant") for$2,080,000 in matching funds to fund a portion of the final design, permitting and construction of the Wall Street Project. 6. Developer has the right to purchase property adjacent to the property on which the Wall Street Project will be constructed as shown on Exhibit A("Developer's Property") from the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust(the "Fields Trust")pursuant to a purchase and sale agreement between the Fields Trust and Developer. Developer intends to acquire Developer's Property and the Fields Trust has dedicated right of way for the Wall Street Project as further described below. Also, in lieu of constructing improvements for a 3/4 street along the western and southern boundaries of Developer's Property (fronting Wall Street) as typically would be required as a condition of approval of development of Developer's Property by the City, Developer is willing to contribute to the Wall Street Project the estimated costs Developer would otherwise spend on the 3/4 street improvements. 7. City desires to complete the Hunziker Infrastructure Project and City and Developer desire to document their respective rights and obligations related to the Wall Street Project. Now,therefore, in consideration of the terms, conditions and covenants herein,the receipt and adequacy of which are confirmed,the parties AGREE as follows: Article 1. City Responsibilities and Obligations: 1.1 Project. Unless this Agreement is terminated per Article 4 of this Agreement,or per Developer's failure to deposit funds as provided in Section 3.3, City agrees to (a)design, obtain permits for, and construct the Wall Street Project, in accordance with applicable city or special district standards, (b) acquire right of way as described below, and(c)provide utilities and obtain easements all as more fully described below. The Wall Street Project and City's responsibilities include but are not necessarily limited to the following: 1.1.1 City will acquire the necessary right of way(or terminate access easements) and obtain temporary construction easements related to the following properties: 1.1.1.1 Approximately 107,830 square feet of right of way along the western and southern boundaries of Developer's Property as described in Exhibit E. A portion of the right of way has been conveyed by the Fields Trust without compensation. This portion is the portion that would typically be required to be dedicated by the City for 3/4 street improvements. 1.1.1.2 In order to minimize the impact of the Wall Street Project on properties adjacent to it on the west, Developer caused the Fields Trust to dedicate Page 2 of 13 additional property. This additional right of way dedication from Developer's Property(the easternmost 15 feet of the right of way area including approximately 30,600 square feet(the "Developer's Additional Right of Way") shall be compensated by the City granting to Developer Transportation Development Tax credits("TDT Credits") in the amount equal to the appraised fair market value of the Developer's Additional Right of Way. See Exhibit D2. The TDT credits shall be transferable by Developer as provided in the TDT ordinance. Additional TDT credits will be granted to Developer for its cash contribution to the Wall Street Project per Section 3.2.4 below. 1.1.1.3 Approximately 25,000 square feet of right of way along the eastern boundary of the property owned by Wall Street Industrial (the"Vial Property") and the easements needed for the construction, maintenance, use, repair and replacement of a sanitary sewer line, related storm sewer and stormwater facilities as depicted on Exhibit DI. 1.1.1.4 All rights of way and easements necessary to construct the East Tigard Sewer Project. 1.1.2 City will design, and produce the 60%Plans, 90% Plans and final drawings for,the Wall Street Project, as described in Section 1.2 below. City will conduct all necessary due diligence, obtain all permits and bids,provide all project management, and construct the Wall Street Project. 1.2. Plans. Preliminary 30%plans for the Wall Street Project were prepared by Murray, Smith& Associates, Inc., and are shown on sheets C 1, C 10 & C 19; C2, C 11 & C20; C3, C 12 & C21; C4, C 13 & C22; C5, C14 &C23, C9, C18 & C27 of the August 2016, Rev.2 set of plans (the "30%Plans") and were reviewed with edits recommended by City and Developer. Developer and City accept the 30% Plans as revised in August, 2016. The costs of the preparation of the Plans are part of Wall Street Project Costs, as defined below. City will deliver to Developer proposed 60%Plans, 90%Plans and final construction drawings for the Wall Street Project, all of which shall be as consistent as reasonably possible with the 30%Plans. City will not finalize any of such plans without first giving Developer a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on the plans and the City shall incorporate Developer's comments into each stage of the plans for the Wall Street Project if and to the extent reasonably practical. Developer must provide to City Developer's comments on any plans within ten(10)business days of City's request therefor. 1.3. Estimated Cost and Schedule. Attached as Exhibit C is the anticipated cost and schedule for design, permitting,bidding, and construction of the Wall Street Project. City will use best efforts to complete the Wall Street Project in accordance with each milestone on the schedule set forth in Exhibit C. 1.4. Possession. City shall endeavor to have possession of all necessary rights of way and easements for the Wall Street Project on or about March 15, 2017. To the extent possible,the City shall have possession of all necessary rights of way and easements for the East Tigard Sewer Project by the same date. Page 3 of 13 1.5. Management. City shall manage the entire Wall Street Project consistent with City's standards and normal and customary engineering and construction management practices. Unless prompt action is required to avoid delay costs, City shall confer with Developer regarding any requests for change orders, extra work or other unforeseen construction issues that exceed 90%of contingency for the Wall Street Project. City shall be permitted to charge a fixed management fee for the Project not to exceed $114,000, which amount will be included in the Wall Street Project Budget described in Article 3. 1.6. Developer Access. Developer intends to construct, and potentially occupy, improvements on Developer's Property prior to completion of the Wall Street Project. City shall maintain reasonable access to Developer's Property during construction and not unduly restrict such access. It is understood, however,that short delays or restrictions in the normal course of constructing public improvements may occur as long as one lane of traffic always provides access to Developer's Property over Wall Street from SW Hunziker Street. City shall use its best efforts to coordinate access issues with Developer. City's obligations in this Section 1.6 are contingent on Developer providing City with a description of its proposed improvements, construction schedule and other information sufficient to permit City to address access in the 60%Plans. Any changes to the 60%Plans necessitated by changes in Developer's plans for Developer's Property shall be at Developer's sole expense. City shall not delay issuance of a certificate of occupancy for improvements on Developer's Property solely due to delay in completion of the Wall Street Project. 1.7 Wall Street Extension Project. City shall seek to fund the Wall Street Extension Project from the owner and/or the developer of the property adjacent to the Wall Street Extension, along with any grants or City funds. Nothing in this Agreement authorizes City to seek additional funds from the Developer for the Wall Street Extension or obligates Developer to contribute funding for the Wall Street Extension. Article 2. Developer Responsibilities and Obligations: 2.1. Payments. Developer will make the payments related to the Wall Street Project as described in Article 3. 2.2. Grant Compliance. Matching funds for this public infrastructure from the federal grant will require follow up reporting on factors such as employment level, amount of private sector investment, and tenant mix. While the Developer owns the property fronting Wall Street it will comply with relevant reporting requirements made by the City as a requirement of the use of federal funds from the Federal Grant, but only as to the portion of Developer's Property owned by Developer and only during the period of time of Developer's ownership of Developer's Property. 2.3. Dedication of right of way. Developer has caused Fields Trust to dedicate at no cost to the City or the Wall Street Project, right of way representing the area needed for a 3/4 street improvement along the Wall Street frontage, including any temporary construction easements as documented in Exhibit D2. Notwithstanding any other provision, this dedication shall be irrevocable. This dedication of right of way pursuant to this Agreement shall satisfy Developer's obligations for right-of-way for the Wall Street Project. Page 4 of 13 2.4. Sewer Project. Developer will have no obligation under this Agreement for any contribution of funds to the East Tigard Sewer Project or to participate in the Wall Street Extension to SW Tech Center Drive. 2.5 LID Consent and Waiver. Developer shall execute with this Agreement the irrevocable and unconditional waiver of the right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district and assessment, in the form attached as Exhibit F, ("Consent and Waiver") in an amount sufficient to reimburse City for the costs associated with completion of the 3/4 street and utilities improvements to Developer's frontage including but not limited to design,engineering and construction,plus financing costs and LID formation expenses. Developer hereby acknowledges that this waiver is in consideration of City constructing the 3/4 street frontage improvements described in this Agreement using City funds, thereby relieving Developer of the obligation to do so at the time of development of Developer's Property. The Waiver and Consent shall also stipulate that it is valid and binding for five (5)years from the date of execution and that Developer agrees that the full amount of the assessment may be financed for no more than five (5) from the date of assessment or the date a building permit is issued for any portion of the Developer's Property,whichever first occurs. The Waiver and Consent shall be effective upon the date of execution by Developer. This Section 2.5 and the Waiver and Consent shall survive termination of this Agreement,may be recorded in the deed records of Washington County, at any time after Developer takes ownership of Developer's Property, shall run with the land, and shall bind the successors and assigns of Developer. Article 3. Wall Street Project Funding and Plan Review: 3.1. General. The "Wall Street Project Budget"and the elements of the Wall Street Project Costs are summarized in Exhibit C. The "Wall Street Project Costs" are all costs, fees, and expenses(hard and soft costs)expended by City to complete the Wall Street Project, and are in the Wall Street Project Budget, as it may be amended. Soft costs include the fees of architects, engineers and consultants, but do not include attorneys' fees, interest, or financing costs. 3.2. Sources and Uses. The overall funding of the Wall Street Project is anticipated to come from the following sources and to be used as follows: 3.2.1 The State Grant- Up to $1,020,000 of the total $1,500,000. These funds are available only for expenses that may be capitalized, including right of way acquisition, design, and construction. The parties understand and agree that$480,000 of the State Grant funds are reserved by the City of Tigard for the construction costs of the Wall Street Extension Project(not a part of this development agreement). The parties further understand and agree that, if the Wall Street Project comes in under budget, State Grant funds may be reallocated by the City of Tigard to other projects that are part of the Hunziker Infrastructure Project. 3.2.2 The Federal Grant—Estimated $2,083,000 (subject to the matching provision contained in the Federal Grant). 3.2.3 The City has appropriated the funds in the amount of$245,845 required to construct the East Tigard Sewer Project(in excess of the $1,437,000 in funds to be provided by Clean Water Services). Page 5 of 13 3.2.4 Developer—$1,650,000,plus any additional amount required pursuant to this Agreement (to be used only for design,bidding, construction and project management of the Wall Street Project). ("Developer's Contribution"). Developer shall make payments according to the following schedule: 1. $77,000 within 10 business days after the date that the City issues a notice to proceed to its design consultant to begin preparation of 60%plans, 2. $77,000 within 10 business days of Developer's receipt of 60%plans,revised budget, and revised schedule. 3. $38,500 within 10 business days of Developer's receipt of 90%plans, revised budget,revised schedule, and engineer's estimate of construction cost. 4. $1,457,500,plus any additional contribution established pursuant to Section 3.5 for the Wall Street Project prior to award of the construction contract.Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement,this deposit is a condition precedent to City's obligation to award the construction contract. Developer's Contribution shall be deposited into a segregated account to be used exclusively for the Wall Street Project. 3.3 Failure to Pay. If Developer chooses not to make any one of the first three payments above, it shall notify the City on or before the due date for each payment. Upon receipt of such notice,this Agreement shall terminate. All payments already made will belong to the City. Failure of City to receive the notice on the due date shall constitute a waiver of the right to terminate as to that payment and the payment shall be made by Developer. This shall not,however,waive Developer's option not to make a subsequent payment. 3.3.1 If the Developer is the owner of the Developer's Property on the date of termination under this Section 3.3,the provisions of Section 4.2 shall apply. 3.3.2 If Developer is not the owner of the Developer's Property on the date of termination under this Section 3.3,the provisions of Section 4.2 shall apply, and, if City elects to proceed with the Wall Street Project, as provided in Section 4.2.1, City may record and enforce the Consent and Waiver at such time as Developer obtains ownership of Developer's Property. 3.4 Funds held in Trust. All funds received by City from Developer pursuant to this Agreement, shall be placed in a trust and agency account and shall be expended only for the actual cost of design,bidding, project management and construction of the Wall Street Project. Within 60 days of substantial completion of the Wall Street Project, City shall provide Developer with reasonable documentation of all expenditures. City shall return to Developer the portion of Developer's Contribution not expended for the Wall Street Project, if any, within 30 days of final payment to City's general contractor. 3.5 Plan Review; Construction Bidding and Cost Adjustment. 3.5.1 If, upon completion of the 60%Plans and associated engineer's cost estimate,the Wall Street Project Costs are expected to exceed the Wall Street Project Budget set forth in Exhibit C,the parties shall revise the scope of the Wall Street Project and Wall Street Project Budget and the summary of the sources of funding described above. Page 6 of 13 3.5.2 If,upon completion of the 90%Plans and associated engineer's cost estimate, the Wall Street Project Costs are expected to exceed the previously agreed-upon Wall Street Project Budget,the Wall Street Project Costs overrun shall be handled as follows: 3.5.2.1 First,the City may choose to reduce the scope of the Wall Street Project. City will not finalize any such plans without first giving Developer a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on the plans and the City shall incorporate Developer's comments into each stage of the plans. In no event shall the City decrease the length of Wall Street so that it no longer extends to a point that is 2,020 feet south of the intersection of SW Wall Street and SW Hunziker Street. 3.5.2.2 Second,the summary of sources of funding shall be updated to incorporate the increase in the City and Developer's respective contributions in proportion to their respective funding commitments,to cover the increased funding obligation. Developer shall be responsible for 55%of agreed upon increased Wall Street Project Costs, and City shall be responsible for 45%of agreed upon increased Wall Street Project Costs. In no event shall City be required to appropriate or spend funds from sources other than the state and federal funding referenced in this Agreement. Funding for increases for party-specific design increases shall be proportioned as set forth in Section 3.8. (This expense may be eligible for federal match if grant matching maximum has yet to be reached for eligible Wall Street Project Costs.) 3.5.2.3 The Wall Street Project Budget shall be updated accordingly. 3.5.3 The City shall then proceed with final design of the Wall Street Project and bidding. If the final design costs exceed the previously agreed-upon Wall Street Project Budget,the cost overrun shall be handled as set forth in Section 3.5.2. 3.5.4 If, upon receipt of the construction bids,the Wall Street Project Costs are expected to exceed the previously agreed-upon Wall Street Project Budget,the overrun shall be handled as required for the 90%Plans, as set forth in Section 3.5.2. Upon agreement as to how to handle the anticipated overrun,the City shall either: a. Award the construction contract with any modifications if City determines that re- bidding is not required by law, or b. Re-bid the Project as modified. 3.5.5 Nothing in this Agreement shall obligate the City Council to award the construction contract if the Wall Street Project construction cost is expected to exceed $3,502,329. If construction cost is expected to exceed this amount, either party may terminate this Agreement within 10 days of the City's opening of the initial construction bids or if applicable, a single rebid of a modified project. If the City elects to terminate under this Section 3.5.5,the provisions of Section 4.2.2 will apply. If the Developer elects to terminate under this Section 3.5.5,the provisions of Section 4.2 will apply. 3.6 Construction Cost Overruns. During construction, City shall confer with Developer as required under Section 1.5. If, during construction of the Wall Street Project, actual Project Costs exceed the final Page 7 of 13 Wall Street Project Budget, City and Developer shall increase their contributions in proportion to their respective previously agreed-upon funding commitments to cover the increased funding obligation(55% to Developer; 45%to City). In no event shall City be required to appropriate or spend funds from sources other than the state and federal funding referenced in this Agreement. Within thirty(30) days of receiving notice of the overrun,the Developer will, if necessary,provide to City additional funds to cover its increased contribution. 3.7 Cost Savings. If any of Developer's Contribution remains in trust after final payment to City's general contractor for the Wall Street Project,the full amount shall be returned to Developer,pursuant to Section 3.4. 3.8. Party-Specific Design Cost Increases. Developer shall be obligated to pay the full additional cost of the Wall Street Project Cost increases attributable to changes in scope requested by Developer after agreement on the 60%Plans. City shall be obligated to pay the full additional cost of the Wall Street Project Cost increases attributable to changes in scope requested by City after agreement on the 60%Plans. 3.9 Survival. The provisions of this Article 3 shall survive termination for purposes of calculating Developer's LID assessment. Article 4. Termination. 4.1. Obligations. If neither party terminates this Agreement as provided in this Section 4,then both parties are bound to complete their respective obligations under this Agreement. 4.2. Provisions governing termination. If this Agreement is terminated under Sections 3.3 or 3.5.5, or 4.3,the City may elect to proceed in either one of the following two ways, which shall be the sole remedies for termination under these Sections. : 4.2.1 City may elect to construct the Wall Street Project including the 3/4 street frontage improvements along Developer's Property using any payments made by Developer,record the LID Consent and Waiver at such time as Developer owns the Developer's Property, form the local improvement district and levy assessments to pay for the frontage improvements, or 4.2.2 City may elect not to construct the Wall Street Project or may elect not to construct the frontage improvements as part of the Wall Street Project,in which case it will permit Developer to build a 3/4 street and utility improvement along the frontage of Developer's Property consistent with the 30% Plans or a full street improvement(consistent with the 30%Plans), or any later plans approved by the parties prior to termination and City shall allow Developer to use all plans, contract rights, studies, specifications,permits and other materials including, without limitation,temporary access easements to complete such street improvements. However,Developer shall not be obligated, under this Agreement, to construct the looped water connection to SW Tech Center Drive. City shall issue occupancy permits for the development of Developer's Property and permit temporary access to Developer's Property over Wall Street and over Hunziker Road if the street is delayed. City shall return to developer any unexpended funds paid by Developer and the waiver of right to remonstrate will be revoked and Page 8of13 nullified, and the City will promptly execute any documents required for such revocation and nullification. 4.3 Conditional right to terminate. In addition to any other right of termination provided for in this Agreement, Developer shall have the right to provide City with a notice of termination of this Agreement on or before July 30, 2017 provided all of the following preconditions to such termination have been met: 4.3.1 Developer has filed a land use application for, at a minimum, 225,000 square feet of new construction suitable for commercial use in the City of Tigard's I-P zone which has been deemed complete by the City by March 31, 2017; 4.3.2 The City review authority on or before July 29, 2017 has issued a decision denying the application or imposing conditions of approval that Developer determines to be unacceptable.; and 4.3.3 Developer has executed and filed with City the irrevocable and unconditional Consent and Waiver of the right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district and assessment for Developer's Property as described in Section 2.5 and shown in Exhibit F. Article 5. Default, Dispute Resolution and Remedies: 5.1. Default 5.1.1 Events of Default: a. Failure of a party to timely and fully perform its obligations hereunder after notice and opportunity to cure as provided in Section 5.1.2 shall be a material breach of this Agreement. b. Any assignment by Developer for the benefit of creditors, or adjudication as a bankrupt, or appointment of a receiver,trustee or creditor's committee over any of such parties. There shall be no cure for a breach under this Section. 5.1.2 Notice and Opportunity to Cure. The party asserting that a breach has occurred shall provide the other party with written notice of the breach and a minimum of ten days to cure the breach in the event of a failure to pay on time or a minimum of 15 days to cure any other breach or to satisfy the party asserting the breach that adequate resources will be deployed and steps taken to cure the breach within a time agreed to by the parties. 5.1.3 Mediation. Except for a breach described in Section 5.1.1 b, if a dispute is not resolved during the opportunity to cure and unless agreed otherwise by the parties,the parties shall participate in at least four hours of mediation as a prerequisite to bringing any available legal or equitable remedy, including termination. Mediation shall be initiated by written notice of one party to the other, setting forth a brief description of the nature of the dispute. If the parties are not able to informally agree on a mediator within 14 days,the matter shall be submitted to Arbitratrion Services of Portland and the selection and mediation shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of the Arbitration Services of Portland. Page 9 of 13 Mediation proceedings hereby are designated as settlement negotiations, and to the extent allowed by law, all offers,promises, conduct and statements,whether oral or written, made in the course of the mediation by any party shall be confidential and inadmissible in legal proceeding involving the parties;provided, however,that evidence which is otherwise admissible or discoverable shall not be rendered inadmissible or non-discoverable as a result of its use in the mediation. 5.2. Remedies 5.2.1 The non-defaulting party may terminate this Agreement if the other party is in default of this Agreement as provided in Section 5.1. 5.2.2. Each party shall have all available remedies at law or in equity to recover damages and compel the performance of the other party under this Agreement. The rights and remedies afforded under this Agreement are not exclusive and shall be in addition to and cumulative with any and all rights otherwise available at law or in equity. The exercise by either party of one any one or more of such remedies shall not preclude the exercise of, at the same time or later, any other remedy for the same default. 5.2.3 Notwithstanding termination for breach or availability of any other remedy, City may form the local improvement district, construct the 3/4 street frontage improvements and assess Developer's Property for the cost thereof, including any other amounts due but not paid under this Agreement. Article 6 Miscellaneous Provisions: 6.1 Discrimination. Developer agrees that in performing its obligations under this Agreement, it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation or national origin. 6.2 Governing Law;Venue; Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed and construed according to the laws of the State of Oregon,without regard to its choice of law provisions. Any action or suit to enforce or construe any provision of this Agreement by either party shall be brought in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Washington County. 6.3 Third parties. City and Developer are the only parties to this Agreement and are the only parties entitled to enforce its terms. There are no third-party beneficiaries of this Agreement. 6.4 Notices. All notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing and may be delivered by electronic mail,personal delivery,by overnight courier service, or by deposit in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, as certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows: City: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attn: Lloyd Purdy Page 10 of 13 With a copy to: Jordan Ramis Two Centerpointe Drive, 6th Floor Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Attn: Tim Ramis Email:tim.ramis@jordanramis.com Developer: TC Tigard LLC 1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 3050 Portland, OR 97201 Attn: Steven Wells Email: swells@trammellcrow.com With a copy to: Radler White Parks&Alexander LLP 111 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97201 Attn: Barbara Radler Email: bradler@radlerwhite.com Notices shall be deemed received by the addressee upon the earlier of actual delivery or refusal of a party to accept delivery thereof. The addresses to which notices are to be delivered may be changed by giving notice of such change in address in accordance with this notice provision. 6.5. Time is of the Essence, Unavoidable Delay. 6.5.1. Time is of the essence in the performance of and adherence to each and every provision of this Agreement. 6.5.2 Neither party shall be considered in breach of or in default with respect to any obligation created hereunder or progress in respect thereto if the delay in performance of such obligations is due to causes that are unforeseeable, beyond its control, and without its fault or negligence, including but not limited to natural disasters, acts of the public enemy, acts of the government(except for the City when the party seeking the benefit of this section is the City), acts of the other party, strikes, litigation involving a party or others relating to zoning or other governmental action or inaction pertaining to the Project, extraordinary delay in the issuance of necessary permits for the Project, and unusually severe weather or delays of suppliers or subcontractors due to such causes or any similar events and/or occurrences beyond the control of such parry. The time or times for performance of the obligations shall be extended for the period of the unavoidable delay; provided, however, that the party seeking the benefit of this Section shall, within ten (10) days after the party becomes aware of the causes of any such unavoidable delay, notify the other party in writing of the cause or causes of the delay and the estimated time of correction. If such delay occurs after award of the construction contract,the parties shall negotiate in good faith an apportionment of any delay damages or related expenses of the construction Contractor. 6.6. No Partnership. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any acts of the parties hereby shall be deemed or construed by the parties, or by any third person,to create the relationship of principal and Page 11 of 13 agent, or of partnership, or of joint venture between Developer and City. 6.7. Non-waiver. Waiver by any party of strict performance of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of or prejudice a party's right to require strict performance of the same or any other provision in the future. A claimed waiver must be in writing and signed by the party granting a waiver. A waiver of one provision of this Agreement shall be a waiver of only that provision. A waiver of a provision in one instance shall be a waiver only for that instance, unless the waiver explicitly waives that provision for all instances. 6.8. Non-waiver of Government Rights. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and except as expressly agreed in this Agreement,by making this Agreement, City specifically is not obligating itself or any other agency with respect to any police power or regulatory actions relating to development or operation of the Project and other improvements to be constructed in the Project, including, but not limited to, rezoning, variances, environmental clearances or any other governmental approvals which are or may be required. 6.9. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable,the remainder of this Agreement, and the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. If a material provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable such that a party does not receive the benefit of its bargain,then the other party shall renegotiate in good faith terms and provisions that will effectuate the spirit and intent of the parties' agreement herein. 6.10. Calculation of Time.Unless referred to as Business Days, all periods of time shall include Saturdays, Sundays, and Legal Holidays. However, if the last day of any period falls on a Saturday, Sunday,or legal holiday,then the period shall be extended to include the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Legal Holiday. "Business Days" shall mean Monday through Friday, and"Legal Holiday" shall mean any holiday observed by the State of Oregon. 6.11. Headings. The section headings are for convenience in reference and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement. 6.12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts,each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. 6.13. Amendments. This Agreement may be modified only by a writing signed by the parties. 6.14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the attachments hereto are the entire agreement between the parties. There is no other oral or written agreement between the parties with regard to this subject matter. There are no oral or written representations made by a party,implied or express,other than those contained in this Agreement. City of Tigard Date Page 12 of 13 TC Tigard LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Trammell Crow Portland Development II, Inc., a Delaware corporation, its Managing Member By: Steven J. Wells, President Date Page 13 of 13 EXHIBIT A Developer's Property D � f t rr. On. 's r \ 6 J T Y y EAST 7 t t' TTRR 1,c,T PRQP�-kiY 1 \\ y _ u P& W RAILRO AD EXHIBIT B Description of Wall Street Construction and Utilities HUNZIKER ROAD TRAMMELL CROW ' CHARTER DEVELOPMENT MECHANICAL �, i I, 70'ROW 2,040 LF NEW ROAD <.r i lh8 X10 TRAMMELL CROW POTSO DOG iI :E DEVELOPMENT jD PARK(CITY- F OWNED) i FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY 9 / TRAMMELL CROW DEVELOPMENT PED AGILYX UNDEVELOPED PARCEL # .. 1 WATERLINE LOOP FROM HUNZIKER TO TECH CENTER DR. 18"STORM LINE TO DITCH OUTFALL \M ENGINERING 'PtMUC WORK8 DEEP RTMENT HUNZIKER INFRASTRUCTURE IJ123 S.W. N4LL BLW. EX B 7MrIR0, OREGON 97223 DEVELOPER AGREEMENT V=Z'303-639-1171 FAX: 5 -621-0731 EXHIBIT B - 9/27/16 95 NO ' � www.ns4Rwo-oR.cov 95047 EXHIBIT C: Wall St. Schedule Summar:(Proposed) February 6, 2017 Issue RFP for design and construction administration services March 7, 2017 First option to terminate agreement (per section 4.1) March 15, 2017 City Acquisition of ROW (non-binding per section 1.4) March 28, 2017 Issue NTP for design and construction administration services March 28, 2017 $77,000 payment due from Trammell Crow (per section 3.2.4) May 28, 2017 60% drawings completed May 28, 2017 $77,000 payment due from Trammell Crow (per section 3.2.4) July 15, 2017 90% drawings completed July 15, 2017 $38,500 payment due from Trammell Crow (per section 3.2.4) August 20, 2017 Final drawings completed September 15, 2017 Advertise invitation to bid documents for construction November 15, 2017 Issue notice to proceed to contractor/begin construction (may be earlier) November 15, 2017 $1,457,500 payment due from Trammell Crow (per section 3.2.4) December 15, 2017 Road Construction begins (latest date) July 22, 2018 Construction completion Schedule is contingent upon EDA review and affirmation of RFPs. Wall Street Project Cost (Summary from 30% Design) Expense Summary for wall Street Project from 30%Design Amount TEMPORARY FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES $ 259,000 ROADWORK $ 336,905 DRAINAGE AND SEWERS $ 479,930 BASES $ 141,575 WEARING SURFACES $ 531,254 PERMANENT TRAFFIC SAFETY AND GUIDANCE DEVICES $ 28,200 PERMANENT TRAFFIC CONTROL AND ILLUMINATION SYSTEMS $ 157,500 RIGHT OF WAY DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL $ 326,340 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS $ 433,395 Property/ROW $ 600,000 30% CONTIGENCY $ 808,230 CITY PROJECT MANAGEMENT FEES $ 114,000 30%DESIGN COSTS $ 220,000 FINAL DESIGN COSTS,PERMITTING&BIDDING $ 350,000 INSPECTION FEES $ 180,000 Total(Estimated) $ 4,966,329 EXHIBIT D1 and D2 D1: Wall Street Industrial ROW �sw RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION Sr,,ep 25090'303'18"E AUGUST 26, 2016 N30'58'43"E 7.00' POINT OF BEGINNING T.L. 400 / MAP 2S 1 01CA MERITAGE FIVE, LLC / 6 PARCEL 1 ` A / 0 RIGHT—OF—WAY / 0 DEDICATION 0 32239 SO. FT. / �+ 0.740 ACRES N 4 N30'58'43"E / N 4' 1601.49' PROPOSED EASTERLY TRACT A RIGHT—OF—WAY PARCEL 2 DEDICATION T.L. 500 / MAP 2S 1 01CA / S30'58'43"W 1615.36' CITY OF TIGARD T.L. 200 MAP 2S 1 01CA 20 T.L. 1100 WALL STREET / MAP 2S 1 01 INDUSTRIAL, LLC DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR do A. RICHARD MAI / TRUSTEE OF T)IE FRED W. EXECUTIVE CENTER, LLC FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING J TRUST AGREEMENT 314 W 151h Street Vancouver.WA 98880-2927 F / / 360.695.3488 360.895.8767 fox Hj A DIVISION OF PBS" VP N4032'31"W www.hgdp.00m Copy/O� 21.09' DRAWN BY: RFS I SCALE: 1"=200' 1 8/26/2016 CF CHECKED BY: TLG I JOB NO.: 4265-00 1 SHEET 1 OF 1 D2: Fields Trust/Trammell Crow ROW S30'58'43"W 7.00' L1 N59'33'18"W 20.00' C1 �><SW HUNZIKER POINT OF \STREET COMMENCEMENT Af POINT OFRIGHT-OF-WAY BEGINNING _. ,0265¢'w 519.9 DEDICATION PARCEL 1 3019' w 30' AUGUST 26, 2016 A 1 T.L. 35'L3 6 MAP 25 1 O1CA O j DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING Q LOTRLLINE 50' TRUST AGREEMENT TRACT Q TL 1100 „A„ Y OLD LOT LINE 4 N30'58'43"E / TL 100/800 1615.36' /ham T.L. 100 PARCEL 2 MAP 2S 1 01CA DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING PROPOSED TRUST AGREEMENT WESTERLY RIGHT—OF—WAY / RIGHT—OF—WAY DEDICATION DEDICATION 107,829 SO. FT. 2.475 ACRES T.L. 200 / 50' T.L. 1600 T.L. 1100 MAP 2S 1 01 MAP 2S101 DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. / TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST AGREEMENT �—C2 TRUST AGREEMENT ti \'p p 314 W 15th Street T�0. . V� Vancouver,WA 98660-2927 �j 360.695.3488 360.695.8767 fax A DIVISION OF PBS" F�p�F SJ `s �s.P• www.h ft.mn L4 DRAWN BY: RFS I SCALE: 1"=200' 8/26/2016 CHECKED BY: TLG I JOB NO.: 4265-00 SHEET 1 OF 2 EXHIBIT E Map Showing Right of Way on Developer's Property Legal description on file as part of Right of Way Acquisition. S30'58'43"W 7.00' L1 N59'33'18"W 20.00' C1 POINT OF CSW HUNZIKER COMMENCEMENT STREET POINT OF1 ,�r- RIGHT—OF—WAY BEGINNING / H2O:?05 s4'w(s S70 '55'W 8'�9' DEDICATION PARCEL 1 30.19' 30' / AUGUST 26, 2016 A 1 0 T.L. 35'L3 6 MAP 25 1 1CA j DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING O CURRENT 50' TRUST AGREEMENT LOT LINE TRACT 0 TL 1100 "A" 4, OLD LOT LINE '58'43"E / TL 1D0/ N30 800 4 1615.36' y /yam% T.L. 100 PARCEL 2 MAP 2S 1 01CA DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR /IV m TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. A FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING PROPOSED y�o TRUST AGREEMENT WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION DEDICATION 107,829 FT. 2.475 ACRES T.L. 200 / 50 T.L. 1100 T.L. 1600 MAP 2S 1 01 MAP 2S 1 01 DAVID M. MUNRO, SUCCESSOR DAVID T MUNRO, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. / TRUSTEE OF THE FRED W. FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST AGREEMENT I—C2 TRUST AGREEMENT f f ` 314 W 15th Street �y\yp0. \W� Ov Vancouver.WA 986W2927 380.895.3488 D 360.895.8767 fax %P A DIVISION OF PBS" `�t'yF SS \sP' wwxtftp L4 DRAWN BY: RFS I SCALE: 1"=200' 8/26/2016 CHECKED BY: TLG I JOB NO.: 4265-00 SHEET 1 OF 2 Exhibit F AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: City of Tigard—Economic Development 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Or 97223 This space provided for recorder's use. IRREVOCABLE WAIVER OF REMONSTRANCE AND CONSENT TO LOCAL IMPROVEMENT FORMATION AND ASSESSMENT CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON (Waiver and Consent) Property Description: Owner(s)Name: On Owner and the City of Tigard(City) entered into the Hunziker Infrastructure Development Agreement(Agreement). That Agreement provides that City shall construct the Wall Street Project(Project), including frontage improvements that Owner would be conditioned to provide at its expense in conjunction with land use approval for development of the Property, owned by Owner, and legally described in the attached and incorporated Exhibit A. Owner expressly acknowledges City's legal authority to require that Owner construct or pay the full cost of the% street and utilities as public improvements along Owner's frontage as provided for herein. The required public improvements subject to this Waiver and Consent consist of: Dedication of right of way and construction of a% street improvement along the west and south boundaries of Owner's Property. The 3/4 street improvements for Wall Street include two segments. One is a 3-lane segment. One is a 2-lane segment. Descriptions provided below: A 3-lane segment with a 70 foot right-of-way section from station 10+80 to 17+60 as shown in the 30% submittal—rev 2 dated August 2016 by MSA, Inc. This segment includes a 6 foot wide sidewalk, 5.5 foot planter strip, and curb and gutter on one side and with a 6 foot bike lane, 11 foot travel lane and a 12 foot center turn lane equaling a total improvement width of 49 feet. Wall Street transitions from a 3 lane to 2 lane road from station 17+60 to 20+00. A 2-lane, 52 foot right-of-way section from station 20+00 to station 31+20 shall include a 6 foot wide sidewalk, 5.5 foot planter strip, and curb and gutter on one side and with a 20 foot pavement width equaling a total improvement width of 32 feet. Within the new road alignment, an 8" sewer, 12"waterline and a 15" storm line will be placed to serve the adjacent properties. The estimated cost of these improvements is $1.83M to 2.07M. Owner agrees that the improvements to be built will constitute"local improvements" as defined in Oregon law and Tigard Municipal Code chapter 13.04 that will directly enhance and benefit the Property. Owner agrees that on completion of construction City may levy the entire cost of the required public improvements against the Property, including LID formation and financing costs, as provided in the engineer's report or as modified and approved by City Council, and that the cost shall be an assessment and lien against the Property. In consideration for the right to terminate the Agreement under the conditions provided therein and for City advancing funds to construct the Wall Street Project, including Owner's portion of the improvements, Owner, for itself, its heirs, executors, successors and assigns, hereby: IRREVOCABLY CONSENTS TO AND WAIVES any right it otherwise may have to remonstrate against or object to: City's formation of a Local Improvement District that includes the Property, construction of the public improvements previously noted and levy of assessment liens for full cost of the public improvements along Owner's frontage as provided in the engineer's report; IRREVOCABLY WAIVES any and all defects and irregularities,known or unknown, current and in the future, in any proceeding for formation of such Local Improvements District, for the certification of the cost of the improvements and for the levying of assessments for same, including but not limited to the giving of notice of any proceeding concerning same.Nothing herein shall constitute a waiver of any right Owner otherwise may have to provide testimony in opposition to or regarding the local improvement district, including the amount of the assessment proposed to be levied against the Property; and, further IRREVOCABLY WAIVES any claim against the City,known or unknown, current or future,to the effect that the improvements deferred by this agreement constitute unlawful exactions or takings of property without compensation. Owner reserves the option to finance the assessments as provided in TMC 13.04.070, except that Owner hereby irrevocably consents and agrees that the finance period shall be limited to five years from the date of the assessment. This Waiver and Consent is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any conditions of approval imposed on specific development application and any City fees and charges, including but not limited to SDC's. City may record this document in the Washington County, Oregon deed records, during any time in that Owner owns the Property, except that City shall not record this waiver if City abandons the Project or excludes Owner's property from the Project as provided in the Agreement. This Waiver and Consent shall expire without further notice and have no further legal effect if the City has not commenced proceedings to form a Local Improvement District that includes this property for some or all of the improvements set out above, or the substantial equivalent of same, within five (5) years from the date of execution of this Waiver and Consent. If a court determines that any portion of this Waiver and Consent is invalid or unenforceable, the remainder shall remain in full force and effect. A court determination that this Waiver and Consent is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, shall in no way relieve Owner from its obligation to pay for the cost of construction of the Wall Street improvements along Owner's frontage. This document affects your legal rights. By executing this Consent and Waiver, you are representing that you have had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel, have read, understand and knowingly agree to the terms herein. OWNER(S) Dated this day of , Owner Owner Owner STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Washington ) Personally appeared the above named and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be a voluntary act. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: CITY OF TIGARD By: Its: City Manager STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 20_, by as City Manager of City of Tigard. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: AIS-2915 10. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider Tigard Street Heritage Trail: ConnectOregon VI IGA with ODOT Submitted By: Lloyd Purdy, Community Development Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE In September 2016, the City of Tigard was notified of a $700,000 grant award for the Tigard Street Heritage Trail from ODOT's ConnectORVI program. ODOT has prepared a grant agreement for this award. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Authorize the City Manager to sign the grant agreement with ODOT for Connect ORVI funding for the Tigard Street Heritage Trail. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard's proposal to the ConnectORVI program received high marks during the grant review process. This project was ranked as the third best project in the state, and the highest ranking bike/ped project. ODOT ConnectORVI funding of$700,000 will be matched to $620,000 in local matching funds for a $1.3 million heritage trail project. Project funding sources: • Connect ORVI funding $700,000 •Washington County MSTIP funding $240,000 • City of Tigard Parks SDC Funds $160,000 • CCDA/Urban Renewal Funds $150,000 • City of Tigard in-kind match $70,000 The Tigard Street Heritage Trail uses a 3/4 mile inactive rail corridor parallel to Tigard Street, leased by the City for 99 years beginning in 2014. This trail provides a safe off-street biking, walking, and skating connection to Downtown Tigard. In summer 2015, the City laid down a temporary porous asphalt treatment from Tiedeman Avenue to Tigard's downtown commercial core and the Tigard Transit Center. This temporary trail has proven the demand to justify a complete multi-use trail that includes a finished surface treatment, lighting, landscaping, amenities, fencing and cultural components. The Tigard Street Heritage Trail will make a strong gateway connection to Downtown Tigard and provides the impetus for a locally funded public plaza between the Chamber of Commerce building and rail line at Main Street. On January 20, 2015, Resolve Architects presented preliminary heritage trail concepts to the Tigard City Council. A final community discussion was held in February 2016 with the focus group to review the draft concept. These heritage trail themes will be carried forward during final design. Tigard has 17.5 miles of existing trails. These trails generally followed riparian and wetland areas. Tigard's existing trails are circuitous, and in wooded areas. The Tigard Street Heritage Trail alignment is not isolated, and follows a street corridor that is busy and visually open. ConnectORVI funding will allow this path to be lit— a first for a trail in Tigard. The Tigard Street Heritage Trail is also part of a unique cultural resource in the City of Tigard. Rare is the Tigard bike and pedestrian infrastructure that can illustrate and celebrate local culture and identity as a "pedestrian boulevard" into downtown Tigard. The Tigard Street Heritage Trail will connect residents and employees to transit and amenities in downtown Tigard, and it will connect residents to the history and heritage of this community. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Decline grant funding and reduce project scope. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council Goals and Milestones 2015-17 Goal #2 Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be. Increase walkable access to open space by advancing plans for new downtown open space, including the Tigard Street Trail plaza, the Fanno Creek Overlook and a Main Street plaza, including programming. Tigard Greenways Trails System Master Plan Tigard Street Trail: Short-term recommended project list. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Projects C. Bike/Pedestrian Facilities. 8. Conversion of Existing North Rail Corridor into a Multi-use Pedestrian Trail. City of Tigard Capital Improvement Project List Ranked on the qualified project list. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION October 18, 2016 — Authorization of$240,000 MSTIP funding agreement. January 20, 2015 —Tigard Street Heritage Trail Design Concepts. August 8, 2015 —Tigard Street Heritage Trail Concepts. November 10, 2015 — Connect ORVI grant submission. Fiscal Impact Cost: $1,200,000 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: CIP, SDC, URA Additional Fiscal Notes: • ODOT ConnectOregonVI funding - $700,000 •Washington County MSTIP funding - $240,000 • City of Tigard Parks SDC Funds - $160,000 • CCDA/Urban Renewal Funds - $150,000 • City in Kind - $70,000 Attachments Tigard Street Heritaze Trail ODOT Grant Misc. Contracts and Agreements No. 31629 GRANT AGREEMENT CONNECTOREGON VI OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONNECTOREGON FUND PROGRAM 2016 Project Name: Tigard Street Trail: A Path to Employment This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the State of Oregon, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "ODOT," and City of Tigard, acting by and through its elected officials, hereinafter referred to as "Recipient," both hereinafter referred to individually or collectively as"Party"or"Parties." 1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective on the date this Agreement is fully executed and approved as required by applicable law. Unless otherwise terminated or extended, Grant Funds under this Agreement shall be available for Project Costs incurred on or before the earlier of five years after the Effective Date or the third anniversary date of the Lottery Revenue Bonds (the "Bonds") issued, in part, to fund this grant (Availability Termination Date). No Grant Funds are available for any expenditures before the Effective Date or after the Availability Termination Date. ODOT's obligation to disburse Grant Funds under this Agreement shall end as provided in Section 6.b.iv of this Agreement. 2. Agreement Documents. This Agreement consists of this document and the following documents: a. Exhibit A: Project Description,Key Milestones, Schedule and Budget b. Exhibit B Recipient Requirements c. Exhibit C: Subcontractor Insurance d. Exhibit D: Memorandum of Agreement and Acknowledgement of ODOT Assistance e. Exhibit E: Application and documents provided by Recipient to ODOT prior to the execution of the Agreement Exhibits A through E are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. Exhibits A through D are attached hereto. In the event of a conflict between two or more of the documents comprising this Agreement, the language in the document with the highest precedence shall control. The precedence of each of the documents comprising this Agreement is as follows, listed from highest precedence to lowest precedence: this Agreement without Exhibits; Exhibit D; Exhibit A; Exhibit B; Exhibit C; Exhibit E. 3. Project Cost; Grant Funds; Match. The total Project Cost is estimated at $1,300,000. In accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, ODOT shall provide Recipient Grant Funds in an amount not to exceed $700,000 or seventy (70) percent of the total eligible Project Costs, whichever is less, of eligible Project Costs described in Section 6 hereof. ODOT acknowledges that Recipient has partially met the required match. ODOT shall reimburse Recipient for seventy four(74) percent of the amount of eligible costs until the sum of$700,000 is reached. Recipient shall provide matching funds for all Project Costs as described in Exhibit A. ODOT will withhold five (5) percent of the Grant Funds to be distributed as provided in Section 6.c. 1-24-17 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 4. Project: a. Use of Grant Funds. The Grant Funds shall be used solely for the Project described in Exhibit A and shall not be used for any other purpose. No Grant Funds will be disbursed for any changes to the Project unless such changes are approved by ODOT by amendment pursuant to Section l Lc hereof. b. Eligible Project Costs. The Grant Funds will only be used for Recipient's actual Project Costs to the extent those costs are (a) reasonable, necessary and directly used for the Project, (b) costs permitted by generally accepted accounting principles established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, as reasonably interpreted by the State, to be capitalized to an asset that is part of the Project, (c) capital expenditures for federal income tax purposes within the meaning of Section 1.150-1(b) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), and(d) eligible or permitted uses of the Grant under State law and this Agreement. Eligible Project Costs do NOT include operating and working capital expenditures charged to the Project by Recipient or payments made to related parties, do NOT include loans or grants to be made to third parties, and may only include the payment of principal due on interim financing for the Project with the prior written consent of the State. c. Project Change Procedures. i. If Recipient anticipates Project key milestones will be delayed by more than ninety (90) days from the key milestones shown in Exhibit A, Recipient shall submit a Request for Change Order (Form 734-2648), the form of which is hereby incorporated by reference, to ODOT's Project Liaison as soon as Recipient becomes aware of any possible delay. The Request for Change Order must be submitted prior to the milestone completion date shown in Exhibit A. The fillable form can be downloaded on-line at the following address: http://www.oreitan.itov/ODOT/TD/AT/Paaes/Forms AoPlications.asox ii. Recipient shall not proceed with any changes to Project scope or delivery schedule prior to the execution of an amendment to this Agreement executed in response to ODOT's approval of a Request for Change. A Request for Change Order may be rejected at the discretion of ODOT. ODOT may choose to request review by the Oregon Transportation Commission. 5. Progress Reports. a. Monthly Reports. Recipient shall submit monthly progress reports to ODOT using the ConnectOregon Monthly Progress Report (Form 734-2668), attached by reference and made a part of this Agreement. ODOT will appoint a Project Liaison after execution of this Agreement and provide Recipient with the contact information. Progress reports must be submitted to the ODOT Project Liaison and ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager by the first Wednesday of each month. The fellable form can be downloaded on-line at the following address: http://www.oreaon.itov/ODOT/TD/AT/Paaes/Forms Apalications.ascx 2 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 b. Final Report. Recipient shall submit a written report to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager that identifies the number of jobs created or retained both during construction and after Project completion, as a direct result of this Project. The report must also include the number of jobs projected in the application. This report must also include data on the methodology that measures the Project's success as described in the grant application. The report must be received and approved by ODOT within eighteen (18) months after the completion of Project. Recipient's obligation to provide this report will survive expiration of this Agreement. Recipient shall use ("Final Report" Form 734-2947), which also must be signed by Recipient. The form is available at: http://www.orenon.aov/ODOT/TD/AT/Pastes/Forms Applications.asox. 6. Disbursement and Recovery of Grant. a. Disbursement Generally. ODOT shall reimburse eligible costs incurred in carrying out the Project, as described in and limited by Section 4.b., up to the Grant Fund amount provided in Section 3. Reimbursements shall be made by ODOT within forty-five (45) days of ODOT's approval of a request for reimbursement from Recipient. Recipient must pay its contractors, consultants and vendors prior to submitting invoices to ODOT for reimbursement. Requests for Reimbursement will identify the Project, Agreement number, Project start and end date, the request for reimbursement number or the account number or both, and itemize all expenses as well as provide a detailed breakdown of Project Costs expended and Grant Funds reimbursed to date, and the amount of undisbursed Grant Funds. Upon request by ODOT, Recipient shall provide to ODOT proof of payment and backup documentation supporting Recipient's invoices. Requests for reimbursement shall be submitted monthly for any month for which Recipient seeks reimbursement of eligible costs. Eligible costs are the reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the Recipient, or under a subagreement described in Section 9 of this Agreement, in performance of the Project and that are not excluded from reimbursement by ODOT, either by this Agreement or by exclusion as a result of financial review or audit. b. Conditions Precedent to Disbursement. ODOT's obligation to disburse Grant Funds to Recipient is subject to satisfaction, with respect to each disbursement, of each of the following conditions precedent: L ODOT has received funding, appropriations, limitations, allotments, or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow ODOT, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to make the disbursement. ii. Recipient is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, including without limitation completion of all prerequisites for reimbursement provided in Exhibit B. iii. Recipient's representations and warranties set forth in Section 7 hereof are true and correct on the date of disbursement with the same effect as though made on the date of disbursement. iv. Recipient has provided to ODOT a request for reimbursement in accordance with Section 6.a. Recipient must submit its final request for reimbursement following completion of the 3 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 Project and no later than ninety (90) days after the earlier of completion of the Project or the Availability Termination Date. Failure to submit the final request for reimbursement within ninety (90) days after the completion of the Project or the Availability Termination Date could result in non-payment. c. Retainage. ODOT will withhold five percent retainage from the amount paid pursuant to each reimbursement request and shall release this retainage to Recipient as the following conditions are met: i. Eighty percent(80%) of the five percent retainage shall be released to Recipient upon final project acceptance by ODOT. ii. Twenty percent (20%) of the five percent retainage shall be released to Recipient upon approval by ODOT of the report described in Section 5.b of this Agreement. In accordance with Administrative Rule OAR 731-035 and Oregon Laws 2013, Chapter 723 (House Bill 5008) ODOT may not pay and the Recipient forfeits the amount under this paragraph if the Recipient does not submit the report required by Section 5.b on or before the due date. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that Recipient may not apply for another ConnectOregon grant during the next application cycle if Recipient fails to submit the report required by Section 5.b on or before the due date. d. Recovery of Grant Funds. Any Grant Funds disbursed to Recipient under this Agreement that are expended in violation of one or more of the provisions of this Agreement ("Misexpended Funds") or that remain unexpended on the earlier of the Availability Termination Date or termination of this Agreement must be returned to ODOT. Recipient shall return all Misexpended Funds to ODOT promptly after ODOT's written demand and no later than fifteen (15) days after ODOT's written demand. Recipient shall return all unexpended Grant Funds to ODOT within fourteen (14) days after the earlier of the Availability Termination Date or termination of this Agreement. 7. Representations and Warranties of Recipient. Recipient represents and warrants to ODOT as follows: a. Organization and Authority. Recipient is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of Oregon and is eligible to receive the Grant Funds. Recipient has full power, authority and legal right to make this Agreement and to incur and perform its obligations hereunder, and the making and performance by Recipient of this Agreement(1)have been duly authorized by all necessary action of Recipient and (2) do not and will not violate any provision of any applicable law, rule, regulation, or order of any court, regulatory commission, board, or other administrative agency or any provision of Recipient's Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws, if applicable, (3) do not and will not result in the breach of, or constitute a default or require any consent under any other agreement or instrument to which Recipient is a party or by which Recipient or any of its properties may be bound or affected. No authorization, consent, license, approval of, filing or registration with or notification to any governmental body or regulatory or supervisory authority is required for the execution, delivery or performance by Recipient of this Agreement. 4 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 b. Binding Obligation. This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by Recipient and constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of Recipient, enforceable in accordance with its terms subject to the laws of bankruptcy, insolvency, or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors' rights generally. c. No Solicitation. Recipient's officers, employees, and agents shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or any item of monetary value from contractors, potential contractors, or parties to subagreements. No member or delegate to the Congress of the United States or State of Oregon employee shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or any benefit arising therefrom. d. No Debarment. Neither Recipient nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, or voluntarily excluded from any federally-assisted transaction, or proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participating in this Agreement by any state or federal agency. Recipient agrees to notify MOT immediately if it is debarred, suspended or otherwise excluded from any federally assisted transaction for any reason or if circumstances change that may affect this status, including without limitation upon any relevant indictments or convictions of crimes. e. Compliance with Oregon Taxes, Fees and Assessments. Recipient is, to the best of the undersigned(s) knowledge, and for the useful life of the Project will remain, current on all applicable state and local taxes,fees and assessments. E Representations and Covenants Regarding the Tax-Exempt Status of Bonds. i. Recipient acknowledges that the Bonds issued to fund this grant have been or are expected to be issued with the interest paid on the Bonds excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes and that the uses of the Grant proceeds and the Project by Recipient during the term of the Bonds may impact the tax-exempt status of the Bonds. Recipient agrees to comply with all applicable provisions of the Code necessary to protect the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from federal income taxation. ii. Recipient shall not,without prior written consent of ODOT,permit more than five percent (5%) of the Project to be used in a"private use" by a "private person" (as defined in the Code) if such private use could result in the State of Oregon, receiving direct or indirect payments or revenues from the portion of the Project to be privately used. This paragraph f. shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. g. The warranties set forth in this Section 7 are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other warranties set forth in this Agreement or implied by law. 5 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 8. Records Maintenance and Access; Audit. a. Records, Access to Records and Facilities. Recipient shall make and retain proper and complete books of record and account and maintain all fiscal records related to this Agreement and the Project in accordance with all applicable generally accepted accounting principles, generally accepted governmental auditing standards and state minimum standards for audits of municipal corporations. Recipient shall ensure that each of its subrecipients and subcontractors complies with these requirements. ODOT, the Secretary of State of the State of Oregon (Secretary) and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers and records of Recipient that are directly related to this Agreement, the funds provided hereunder, or the Project for the purpose of making audits and examinations. In addition, ODOT, the Secretary and their duly authorized representatives may make and retain excerpts, copies, and transcriptions of the foregoing books, documents, papers, and records. Recipient shall permit authorized representatives of ODOT, and the Secretary to perform site reviews of the Project, and to inspect all vehicles, real property, facilities and equipment purchased by Recipient as part of the Project, and any transportation services rendered by Recipient. b. Retention of Records. Recipient shall retain and keep accessible all books, documents, papers, and records, that are directly related to this Agreement, the funds or the Project until the date that is three (3) years following the later of the final maturity or earlier retirement of all of the Bonds funding the Grant (including the final maturity or redemption date of any obligations issued to refund the Bonds, or such longer period as may be required by other provisions of this Agreement or applicable law, following the Availability Termination Date. State anticipates issuing 20 year Lottery Revenue bonds, therefore, Recipient should anticipate retaining project records until at least June 30, 2040. It is recommended that the Recipient consult with the State before final destruction of Project records. If there are unresolved audit questions at the end of the period described in this Section 8, Recipient shall retain the records until the questions are resolved. c. Expenditure Records. Recipient shall document the expenditure of all Grant Funds disbursed by ODOT under this Agreement. Recipient shall create and maintain all expenditure records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and in sufficient detail to permit ODOT to verify how the Grant moneys were expended. This Section 8 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. 9. Recipient Subagreements and Procurements a. Subagreements. Recipient may enter into agreements with sub-recipients, contractors or subcontractors (collectively, "subagreements")for performance of the Project. i. All subagreements must be in writing, executed by Recipient and must incorporate and pass through all of the applicable requirements of this Agreement to the other party or parties to the subagreement(s). Use of a subagreement does not relieve Recipient of its responsibilities under this Agreement. 6 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 ii. Recipient shall require all of its contractors performing work under this Agreement to name ODOT as a third party beneficiary of Recipient's subagreement with the Contractor and to name ODOT as an additional oblige on contractors' bonds. iii. Recipient agrees to provide ODOT with a copy of any signed subagreement upon request by ODOT. Any substantial breach of a term or condition of a subagreement relating to funds covered by this Agreement must be reported by Recipient to ODOT within ten (10) days of its being discovered. b. Subagreement indemnity; insurance. i. Recipient's subagreement(s) shall require the other party to such subagreements(s) that is not a unit of local government as defined in ORS 190.003, if any, to indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless ODOT and its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, actions, liabilities, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising from a tort, as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260, caused, or alleged to be caused, in whole or in part, by the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the other party to Recipient's subagreement or any of such party's officers, agents, employees or subcontractors ("Claims'). It is the specific intention of the Parties that ODOT shall, in all instances, except for Claims arising solely from the negligent or willful acts or omissions of ODOT, be indemnified by the other party to Recipient's subagreement(s) from and against any and all Claims. ii. Any such indemnification shall also provide that neither Recipient's subrecipient(s), contractor(s) nor subcontractor(s), nor any attorney engaged by Recipient's subrecipient(s), contractor(s) nor subcontractor(s) shall defend any claim in the name of ODOT or any agency of the State of Oregon, nor purport to act as legal representative of the State of Oregon or any of its agencies, without the prior written consent of the Oregon Attorney General. The State may, at any time at its election, assume its own defense and settlement in the event that it determines that Recipient's subrecipient is prohibited from defending the State, or that Recipient's subrecipient is not adequately defending the State's interests, or that an important governmental principle is at issue or that it is in the best interests of the State to do so. The State reserves all rights to pursue claims it may have against Recipient's subrecipient if the State of Oregon elects to assume its own defense. iii. Recipient shall require the other party, or parties, to each of its subagreements that are not units of local government as defined in ORS 190.003 to obtain and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts provided in Exhibit C to this Agreement. c. Procurements. Recipient shall make purchases of any equipment, materials, or services for the Project under procedures that comply with Oregon law, including all applicable provisions of the Oregon Public Contracting Code and rules, ensuring that: 7 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 L all applicable clauses required by federal statute, executive orders and their implementing regulations are included in each competitive procurement; ii. all procurement transactions are conducted in a manner providing full and open competition; iii. procurements exclude the use of statutorily or administratively imposed in-state or geographic preference in the evaluation of bids or proposals (with exception of locally controlled licensing requirements). 10. Termination a. Termination by ODOT. MOT may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice of termination to Recipient, or at such later date as may be established by MOT in such written notice, if: i. Recipient fails to perform the Project within the time specified herein or any extension thereof or commencement, continuation or timely completion of the Project by Recipient is, for any reason,rendered improbable, impossible, or illegal; or ii. MOT fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow ODOT, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement; or iii. Federal or state laws, rules, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that the Project is no longer allowable or no longer eligible for funding under this Agreement; or iv. The Project would not produce results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds; or v. Recipient takes any action pertaining to this Agreement without the approval of MOT and which under the provisions of this Agreement would have required the approval of ODOT. b. Termination by Recipient. Recipient may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice of termination to ODOT, or at such later date as may be established by Recipient in such written notice, if- i. £i. The requisite local funding to continue the Project becomes unavailable to Recipient; ii. Federal or state laws, rules, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that the Project is no longer allowable or no longer eligible for funding under this Agreement. iii. MOT fails to make payments due in accordance with this Agreement. 8 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 c. Termination by Either Party. Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon at least ten (10) days' notice to the other Party and failure of the other Party to cure within the period provided in the notice, if the other Party fails to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement. d. Rights upon Termination; Remedies. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued prior to termination. The remedies set forth in this Agreement are cumulative and are in addition to any other rights or remedies available at law or in equity. 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS a. Contribution. If any third party makes any claim or brings any action, suit or proceeding alleging a tort as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260 ("Third Party Claim")against ODOT or Recipient with respect to which the other Party may have liability, the notified Party must promptly notify the other Party in writing of the Third Parry Claim and deliver to the other Party a copy of the claim, process, and all legal pleadings with respect to the Third Party Claim. Each Party is entitled to participate in the defense of a Third Party Claim, and to defend a Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing. Receipt by a Party of the notice and copies required in this paragraph and meaningful opportunity for the Party to participate in the investigation, defense and settlement of the Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing are conditions precedent to that Party's liability with respect to the Third Party Claim. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which ODOT is jointly liable with Recipient(or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), ODOT shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by Recipient in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of ODOT on the one hand and of the Recipient on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of ODOT on the one hand and of Recipient on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses,judgments, fines or settlement amounts. ODOT's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if ODOT had sole liability in the proceeding. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which Recipient is jointly liable with ODOT (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), Recipient shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by ODOT in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of Recipient on the one hand and of ODOT on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of Recipient 9 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 on the one hand and of ODOT on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses,judgments, fines or settlement amounts. Recipient's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if it had sole liability in the proceeding. b. Dispute Resolution. The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement. In addition, the Parties may agree to utilize a jointly selected mediator or arbitrator(for non-binding arbitration)to resolve the dispute short of litigation. c. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or extended only by a written instrument signed by both Parties and approved as required by applicable law. d. Duplicate Payment. Recipient is not entitled to compensation or any other form of duplicate, overlapping or multiple payments for the same work performed under this Agreement from any agency of the State of Oregon or the United States of America or any other party, organization or individual. e. No Third Party Beneficiaries. ODOT and Recipient are the only Parties to this Agreement and are the only Parties entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in this Agreement gives, is intended to give, or shall be construed to give or provide any benefit or right, whether directly or indirectly, to a third person unless such a third person is individually identified by name herein and expressly described as an intended beneficiary of the terms of this Agreement. E Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any communications between the Parties hereto or notices to be given hereunder shall be given in writing by personal delivery, facsimile, email or mailing the same, postage prepaid, to Recipient Contact or ODOT Contact at the address or number set forth on the signature page of this Agreement, or to such other addresses or numbers as either Party may hereafter indicate pursuant to this Section l l.f. Any communication or notice personally delivered shall be deemed to be given when actually delivered. Any communication or notice delivered by facsimile shall be deemed to be given when receipt of the transmission is generated by the transmitting machine, and to be effective against ODOT, such facsimile transmission must be confirmed by telephone notice to ODOT Contact. Any communication by email shall be deemed to be given when the recipient of the email acknowledges receipt of the email. Any communication or notice mailed shall be deemed to be given when received. g. Governing Law, Consent to Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without regard to principles of conflicts of law. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "Claim")between ODOT (or any other agency or department of the State of Oregon) and Recipient that arises from or relates to this Agreement shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Marion County in the State of Oregon. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by the State of Oregon of any form of defense or immunity, whether sovereign immunity, governmental immunity, immunity based on the eleventh amendment to 10 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 the Constitution of the United States or otherwise, from any Claim or from the jurisdiction of any court. Each party hereby consents to the exclusive jurisdiction of such court, waives any objection to venue, and waives any claim that such forum is an inconvenient forum. h. Compliance with Law. Recipient shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the Agreement or to the implementation of the Project, including without limitation as described in Exhibit B. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Recipient expressly agrees to comply with (i) Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964; (ii) Title V and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (iii) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659A.142; (iv) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (v) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. i. Insurance; Workers' Compensation. All employers, including Recipient, that employ subject workers who provide services in the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656.017 and provide the required Workers' Compensation coverage, unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. Employer's liability insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 must be included. Recipient shall ensure that each of its subrecipient(s), contractor(s), and subcontractor(s) complies with these requirements. j. Independent Contractor. Recipient shall perform the Project as an independent contractor and not as an agent or employee of ODOT. Recipient has no right or authority to incur or create any obligation for or legally bind ODOT in any way. ODOT cannot and will not control the means or manner by which Recipient performs the Project, except as specifically set forth in this Agreement. Recipient is responsible for determining the appropriate means and manner of performing the Project. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that Recipient is not an "officer", "employee", or "agent" of ODOT, as those terms are used in ORS 30.265, and shall not make representations to third parties to the contrary. k. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall be construed and enforced as if this Agreement did not contain the particular term or provision held to be invalid. 1. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts (by facsimile or otherwise), each of which is an original and all of which together are deemed one agreement binding on all Parties, notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. m. Integration and Waiver. This Agreement, including all Exhibits, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. The delay or failure of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by that party of that or any other provision. Recipient, by the signature 11 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 below of its authorized representative, hereby acknowledges that it has read this Agreement, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions. SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW 12 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 THE PARTIES, by execution of this Agreement, hereby acknowledge that their signing representatives have read this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. The Oregon Transportation Commission at its August 2016 meeting approved the ConnectOregon VI project application list and delegated authority to the Director of the Oregon Department of Transportation to enter into project agreements. City of Tigard, by and through its elected STATE OF OREGON, by and through its officials Department of Transportation By By (Legally designated representative) Director Name Date (printed) APPROVAL RECOMMENDED Date By Freight Planning Program Manager By Date Name (printed) By Active Transportation Section Manager Date Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By Marvin D. Fjordbeck, Senior Assistant (If required in local process) Attorney General by email 1/24/2017. By Recipient's Legal Counsel ODOT Contact: Marie Wright, ConnectOregon Program Manager Date ODOT- Active Transportation Section 555 13th Street NE Recipient Contact: Salem, OR 97301 Lloyd D. Purdy, III, Economic Development 503-986-3327 Manager marie.a.wright@odot.state.or.us 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 718-2442 Iloydp@tigard-or.gov 13 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 EXHIBIT A Project Description, Key Milestones, Schedule and Budget Agreement No. 31629 Application Number: 1B0380 Project Name: Tigard Street Trail: A Path to Employment A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project will construct a 10 to 12 foot wide, 3/4 mile paved pathway from Tiedeman Avenue to Main Street, adjacent to Tigard Street. The project includes lighting, landscaping, fencing, and site furnishings. B. PROJECT KEY MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE Project has four (4) Key Milestone(s). Key Milestones are used for evaluating performance on Project as described in the Agreement. Key Milestones cannot be changed without an amendment to the Agreement. If Recipient anticipates Project Key Milestones will be delayed by more than ninety (90) days, Recipient shall submit a Request for Change Order, as described in Section 4(c) of the Agreement, to the ODOT Project Liaison as soon as Recipient becomes aware of any possible delay. The Request for Change Order must be submitted prior to the Key Milestone completion date shown in this Exhibit. The anticipated start date of Project is: 3/1/2017 The estimated completion date of Project is: 7/9/2017 Table 1:Key Milestones Key Description Estimated Due Date Milestone 1 Scoping and planning NA 2 Right of way and land acquisition NA 3 Permits 11/1/2017 4 Final plans/bidding engineering documents 12/13/2017 5 Construction contract award 1/17/2018 6 Project completion 7/9/2018 14 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 Table 2—Funding Breakdown A Total Project Cost $1,300,000 B Grant Award Amount $700,000 C Recipient Match(must be at least 30%of Total Project Cost) $600,000 15 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 EXHIBIT B Recipient Requirements I. Recipient shall comply with all applicable requirements of ORS 367.080 to 367.086, OAR chapter 731, Division 35. Failure by Recipient to comply with these requirements will subject Recipient to the sanctions as described in OAR735-035-0080. II. Recipient shall comply with ORS 280.518, which requires any economic development program financed with proceeds from the state lottery to display a sign in a conspicuous location on Project site or specify in the program information that Project is financed with proceeds from the state lottery. ODOT will provide standard signage as appropriate. If Recipient chooses to make a custom sign, Recipient must obtain written approval from ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager to use its custom sign and Recipient shall be responsible for the cost of such custom signage. If Project site is remote and a sign would not be visible to the public, Recipient shall provide proof to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager that Recipient has specified in its program information that Project is financed with proceeds from the state lottery. III. Recipient shall comply with all applicable provisions of ORS 279C.800 to 279C.870 pertaining to prevailing wage rates and including, without limitation, that workers on the Project shall be paid not less than rates in accordance with ORS 279C.838 and 279C.840 pertaining to wage rates and ORS 279C.836 pertaining to having a public works bond filed with the Construction Contractors' Board. IV. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that, whenever OAR 839-025-0230(4) requires ODOT as the public agency providing public funds for a project that is a public work under ORS 279C.800(6)(a)(B) to pay the fee required under ORS 279C.825, ODOT will calculate and pay the fee and deduct the amount of the fee from Recipient's Grant Funds under this Agreement. V. Recipient shall notify ODOT's Project Liaison and ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager in writing when any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement. VI. Recipient must provide matching funds in an amount equal to thirty (30) percent of the eligible Project Costs. Matching funds must be used for elements necessary for implementation of Project, including land, excavation, permits, engineering, payroll, special equipment purchase, rental or lease. Recipient is responsible for all costs in excess of the Grant Funds. VII. Recipient shall pay back all of the Grant Funds to ODOT if Project is not completed in accordance with, or consistent with Exhibit A and Exhibit E, as each may be amended. Recipient obligations for Recovery of Grant Funds are provided in Section 6.d of this Agreement. VIII. Recipient and ODOT's Project Liaison shall, upon completion of all on-site work for the Project, perform an on-site review. Once review is completed, the ODOT Project Liaison may recommend acceptance of Project by signing the ConnectOregon "Recommendation of 16 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 Acceptance" (Form 734-2649), which also must be signed by Recipient. The form is available at: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/AT/Pages/Forms Applications.aspx IX. Recipient shall, at its own expense, maintain and operate Project upon completion and throughout the useful life of Project at a minimum level that is consistent with normal depreciation or service demand or both. ODOT and Recipient agree that the useful life of Project is defined as twenty (20) years. Recipient has, by submitting its application for this ConnectOregon VI grant, represented and certified to sufficient funds and to its ability to operate and maintain Project. Recipient may not transfer, convey, sell or lease the property and assets of the Project during the useful life of the Project without the prior written approval of ODOT. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Recipient agrees to require any successor owner of the Project property to comply with this requirement. Failure to comply with this requirement may be remedied by Recipient or its successor in interest by (a) restoring the property to the uses(s) required by this Agreement or (b) repayment of expended funds. In the event repayment of expended funds is required, the amount determined using the Straight Line Depreciation (SLD) method must be repaid to ODOT. The SLD is calculated by taking the grant amount divided by twenty years. ODOT may conduct site reviews of the Project as provided in Section 8.a of this Agreement throughout the useful life of the Project. This paragraph shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. X. Recipient shall, upon execution of this Agreement and as a condition to this Agreement, complete and file with the appropriate County Clerk, "Memorandum of Agreement and Acknowledgment of ODOT Assistance", substantially in the form of Exhibit D attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Recipient shall provide confirmation of this filing by forwarding to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager a notarized copy of the recorded Memorandum of Agreement and Acknowledgment of ODOT Assistance. By means of said acknowledgment of Recipient's financial obligations, the continued use of said property for public purposes, and the maintenance of the facility or service at a level consistent with normal depreciation or demand or both is recognized and attached to the property as conditions. Any interest in said property by ODOT is proportional to the state participation in Project. While in default of conditions of this Agreement, Recipient will be ineligible to receive state funds from any ODOT-administered program for any project on a street, road or property. The Memorandum of Agreement and Acknowledgment of ODOT Assistance shall remain in place for the useful life of Project. ODOT acknowledges that such interest shall not be deemed a lien, mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument or interest granted by Recipient for security purposes. The useful life of Project is defined as twenty (20)years. Reimbursement to Recipient will not be made until the Recipient receives a letter from the ConnectOregon Program Manager indicating that the conformed copy of the Memorandum of Agreement and Acknowledgement of Assistance has been received. Recipient may have additional obligations to meet in prior to receiving reimbursement for construction costs identified in this Agreement. XI. Recipient shall provide pre-construction Project photographs within thirty (30) days of the execution of this Agreement. Recipient shall provide Project photographs thirty (30) days after Project is completed. These photographs must be provided to the ODOT Project Liaison and ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager. 17 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 XII. If shared use path, sidewalk, curb ramp and traffic signal improvements are on, along, or intersect a state highway, or ODOT owned property, Recipient shall: a. Work with the ODOT contact to obtain a miscellaneous permit to occupy state right of way through the ODOT District Office prior to the commencement of construction. b. Ensure Project meets current ODOT Highway Design Manual design standards for the work that is on or along the state highway. c. Follow ODOT's processes in addressing Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) features, including using the ODOT Highway Design Manual, Design Exception process, ODOT Standard Drawings, State's Construction Specifications, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control, and current State Traffic Signal Policy and Guidelines, and ODOT's Curb Ramp Inspection form. d. At Project completion, send an ADA Ramp Inspection Form 734-5020 to the address on the form as well as to ODOT's Contact. State's fillable ADA Ramp Inspection Form and instructions are available at the following address: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/CONSTRUCTION/Pages/HwvConstFormsl.aspx e. Work with ODOT's contact when on any traffic signal timing signal improvements are involved. ODOT maintains responsibility, unless an agreement exists with Recipient that specifically allows Recipient to perform that function. As part of those traffic signal responsibilities ODOT shall: i. Ensure its Region Electrical Crew, at Project expense, perform the signal equipment environmental testing and perform the signal field testing and turn on. ii. Retain the right of review of the traffic signal timing for signals on state highways, or those which State maintains, and shall reserve the right to request adjustments when needed. iii. Notify the local jurisdiction whenever timing changes that affect the operation of local street connections to the state highway are scheduled. All modifications shall follow guidelines set forth in the current Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and the current ODOT's Traffic Signal Policy and Guidelines. iv. Maintain the pavement surrounding the vehicle detector loops installed in the state highway in such a manner as to provide adequate protection for said detector loops at its own expense upon completion of the project. v. Maintain the pavement markings and signing installed on the state highway in accordance with current ODOT standards. 18 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 XIII. Recipient shall, at its own expense, periodically inspect the Project upon completion and throughout the useful life of the Project to ensure continuing compliance with ADA standards. This provision shall survive termination of the Agreement. XIV. Additional requirements a. Prerequisites for Reimbursement of Costs—General i. Prior approvals. Recipient shall provide documentation of having met all pre- construction requirements, including, but not limited to, meeting all public agency conditions of Project approval and obtaining all Project-specific land entitlements and permits, including necessary ODOT permits, prior to any construction costs (labor and material) being considered eligible for reimbursement or reimbursed. Recipient shall coordinate with ODOT's Project Liaison to determine if ODOT permits or other requirements are needed. Project Costs will be reimbursed from Grant Funds only through the design phase of Project until all applicable documentation is received by ODOT. Recipient shall provide this documentation to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager ii. Matching Funds. Recipient shall provide documentation of having secured the matching funds prior to any construction costs (labor and material) being considered eligible for reimbursement or reimbursed from Grant Funds. The matching funds must be available and committed for the duration of Project. Recipient shall provide this documentation to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager. Required proof of match would be met with the following a) a bank statement or proof of a bank loan for the Project, b) an approved operational budget for the Project, c) minutes of a board meeting authorizing funding for the Project, d) or a resolution authorizing Project funds and the match funds. iii. Pre-construction estimate. Recipient shall provide a pre-construction estimate based on the final design prior to any construction (labor and material) costs being considered eligible for reimbursement or reimbursed from Grant Funds. Project Costs will only be reimbursed through the design phase of Project until all applicable documentation is received. Recipient shall provide this documentation to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager. iv. General Standards. The Project shall be completed within industry standards and best practices to ensure the functionality and serviceability of the Program's investment meets the intent of the application and the Program. v. Crossing Orders. Recipient shall obtain Crossing Order(s) for project prior to any construction costs (labor and material) being considered eligible for reimbursement or reimbursed from Grant Funds. Project Costs will only be reimbursed through the design phase of Project until Crossing Order(s) is obtained. Recipient shall provide this documentation to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager. 19 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 b. Prerequisites for Reimbursement of Construction Costs — Bicycle-Pedestrian Design Documentation. Recipient shall provide design documentation which demonstrates compliance with the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and the current ODOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide. Documentation shall be provided a when design is thirty (30) percent, sixty (60) percent and ninety (90) percent complete. This documentation must be received prior to any construction cost (labor and material) being considered eligible for reimbursement or reimbursed from Grant Funds. Project Costs will be reimbursed from Grant Funds only through the design phase of Project until all applicable documentation is received by ODOT. Recipient shall provide this documentation to ODOT's ConnectOregon Program Manager. c. Recipient acknowledges project is adjacent to ODOT facilities and has ODOT technical review requirements. Recipient shall be responsible for the costs of ODOT's technical review, which is estimated to be $15,000. The recipient will work with the Regional ODOT Contact to arrange for the advance deposit. Recipient may submit an invoice for this advance deposit to the ConnectOregon Program for reimbursement. 20 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 EXHIBIT C Subagreement Insurance Requirements GENERAL. Recipient shall require in its first tier subagreements with entities that are not units of local government as defined in ORS 190.003, if any, to: i) obtain insurance specified under TYPES AND AMOUNTS and meeting the requirements under ADDITIONAL INSURED, "TAIL" COVERAGE, NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OR CHANGE, and CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE before performance under the subagreement commences, and ii) maintain the insurance in full force throughout the duration of the subagreement. The insurance must be provided by insurance companies or entities that are authorized to transact the business of insurance and issue coverage in the State of Oregon and that are acceptable to ODOT. Recipient shall not authorize work to begin under subagreements until the insurance is in full force. Thereafter, Recipient shall monitor continued compliance with the insurance requirements on an annual or more frequent basis. Recipient shall incorporate appropriate provisions in the subagreement permitting it to enforce compliance with the insurance requirements and shall take all reasonable steps to enforce such compliance. In no event shall Recipient permit work under a subagreement when Recipient is aware that the contractor is not in compliance with the insurance requirements. As used in this section, "first tier" means a subagreement in which the Recipient is a Party. TYPES AND AMOUNTS. i. WORKERS COMPENSATION. Insurance in compliance with ORS 656.017, which requires all employers that employ subject workers, as defined in ORS 656.027, to provide workers' compensation coverage for those workers, unless they meet the requirement for an exemption under ORS 656.126(2). Employer's liability insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 must be included. ii. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY. Commercial General Liability Insurance covering bodily injury, death, and property damage in a form and with coverages that are satisfactory to ODOT. This insurance shall include personal injury liability, products and completed operations. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence form basis, with not less than the following amounts as determined by ODOT: Bodily Injury, Death and Property Damage: $1,000,000 per occurrence (for all claimants for claims arising out of a single accident or occurrence). iii. AUTOMOBILE Liability Insurance: Automobile Liability. Automobile Liability Insurance covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles. This coverage may be written in combination with the Commercial General Liability Insurance (with separate limits for "Commercial General Liability" and "Automobile Liability"). Automobile Liability Insurance must be in not less than the following amounts as determined by ODOT: 21 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 Bodily Injury, Death and Property Damage: $1,000,000 per occurrence (for all claimants for claims arising out of a single accident or occurrence). iv. ADDITIONAL INSURED. The Commercial General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability insurance must include ODOT, its officers, employees and agents as Additional Insureds but only with respect to the contractor's activities to be performed under the Subcontract. Coverage must be primary and non-contributory with any other insurance and self-insurance. V. "TAIL" COVERAGE. If any of the required insurance policies is on a"claims made" basis, such as professional liability insurance, the contractor shall maintain either "tail" coverage or continuous "claims made" liability coverage, provided the effective date of the continuous "claims made" coverage is on or before the effective date of the Subcontract, for a minimum of twenty-four (24) months following the later of: (i) the contractor's completion and Recipient's acceptance of all Services required under the Subcontract or, (ii) the expiration of all warranty periods provided under the Subcontract. Notwithstanding the foregoing twenty-four (24) month requirement, if the contractor elects to maintain "tail" coverage and if the maximum time period "tail" coverage reasonably available in the marketplace is less than the twenty-four (24) month period described above, then the contractor may request and ODOT may grant approval of the maximum "tail " coverage period reasonably available in the marketplace. If ODOT approval is granted, the contractor shall maintain "tail" coverage for the maximum time period that "tail" coverage is reasonably available in the marketplace. vi. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OR CHANGE. The contractor or its insurer must provide thirty (30) days' written notice to Recipient before cancellation of, material change to, potential exhaustion of aggregate limits of, or non-renewal of the required insurance coverage(s). vii.CERTIFICATE(S) OF INSURANCE. Recipient shall obtain from the contractor a certificate(s) of insurance for all required insurance before the contractor performs under the Subcontract. The certificate(s) or an attached endorsement must specify: i) all entities and individuals who are endorsed on the policy as Additional Insured and ii) for insurance on a "claims made" basis, the extended reporting period applicable to "tail" or continuous "claims made" coverage. The Recipient shall immediately notify ODOT of any change in insurance coverage. 22 ODOT/City of Tigard Agreement No. 31629 After recording, return to: EXHIBIT D MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ODOT ASSISTANCE [State Recording Authority: ORS 93.710 and ORS 205.130(2)] Agreement Number: 31629 Project Name: Tigard Street Trail: A Path to Employment Grant Agreement No. 31629 ("Grant Agreement") between the City of Tigard and the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation (ODOT) was executed on . Pursuant to Exhibit B, Section X, of the Grant Agreement, upon the recording of this document, the City of Tigard will receive Grant Funds for Project described in the Grant Agreement. The property and assets under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard will be improved with the assistance from the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation, in accordance with the terms of the Grant Agreement. Such assistance will be provided to City of Tigard, in reimbursement of costs associated with the Tigard Street Trail: A Path to Employment Project. The use and disposition of said property is subject to the terms of the Grant Agreement, copies of which may be obtained from the Director of ODOT. A description of the improved property is attached. City of Tigard By: (Notary Stamp) Title: State of Oregon: County of Signed or attested before me on by (Date) (Name of person) My commission expires on STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By: (Notary Stamp) McGregor Lynde Title: Active Transportation Section Manager State of Oregon: County of Signed or attested before me on by (Date) (Name of person) My commission expires on Oregon Department of Transportation; 555 13th Street NE, Salem, OR 97301-4178. 23 AIS-2999 11. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 02/07/2017 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Continuation of Legislative Public Hearing - Consider Amendment to TMC 15.06.020 Permitting Franchise Agreements with Special & County Districts Prepared For: Toby LaFrance Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Public Hearing - Business Legislative Meeting - Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public.Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall Tigard Amend TMC 15.06 to update the purpose of the ordinance and the definition of "Person" and clarify utility relocation requirements? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Chapter 15.06 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) covers Tigard's Franchised Utility Ordinance. Due to recent court decisions, Council should consider changes that will clarify the ordinance and bring the ordinance up to date. Three changes are recommended by the city's Franchise Attorney, Nancy Werner of Beery Elsner & Hammond, LLP. These changes are: 1. Update the "Purpose" of the ordinance in TMC 15.06.030. This change does not change the purpose, but clarifies it. The Oregon Supreme Court's decisions inKogue Malley Sever Services P. Phoenix and NWI Natural v. Gresham indicate that city charges imposed on other municipal entities, including districts like TVWD and CWS, are lawful so long as they are a "fee." The changes will clarify that Tigard's ordinance allows a "fee." The changes make sure it is broad enough to reflect the reality that these fees go to the general fund. 2. Update the definition of"Person" and "Telecommunications" in TMC 15.06.020. The definition of"Person" is changed to remove the exclusion of special districts or county service districts and specifically add "government entities." This change will allow Tigard to charge Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) and Clean Water Services (CWS) a Right of Way Franchise Fee under this ordinance. TVWD is currently paying the fee in their Beaverton and Hillsboro service areas. TVWD provides water to Tigard in the areas north of Highway 217. Staff from TVWD and City of Tigard are working to implement the fee with TVWD starting in April 2017. In addition, Washington County cities, including Tigard, is in the process of implementing the fee with CWS. In order for Tigard to implement the fee,we will need to change the ordinance to remove the exclusion. In addition, with the clarification of the definition of"Person" to include governments, the definition of"Telecommunications" can be simplified by removing the reference to "government entity" since that is now part of the definition of a "person." 3. Update TMC 15.06.260 "Relocation or Removal of Facilities." In general, court decisions in the last few years, including decisions by the United States Supreme Court and the Oregon courts, have changed the potential remedies of utilities and developers when it comes to certain relocation costs. The proposed change is intended to ensure that the City does not incur those costs,which could happen should a developer sue the City based on relocation costs that are conditions of a land use approval. The change removes the language that arguably assumes every relocation related to private development should be done at the developer's cost, and gives the utility a lot of power to hold up projects by demanding developers pay relocation costs upfront. Developers will still pay relocation costs in the vast majority of cases, but this change gives the City more flexibility in cases where the developer is constructing public improvements that may not primarily benefit their development. This will reduce the risk of lawsuits from the developer against the City in those (rare) cases in which the project requiring relocation is constructed by a developer but really is more of a public benefit than a private one. Given the recent lawsuit by Frontier on this issue, you should expect them or other utilities to show up at the land use hearing on this subject. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could decide to approve some, or none, of the three proposed changes. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION January 10, 2017 Additionally, the change that permits charging the franchise fee to Clean Water Services was discussed during the meetings on the Sewer Surcharge. Council discussed the Sewer Surcharge as the Council and Budget Committee three times between April 2014 and November 2014 and approved the increase to the Sewer Base Fee on April 19, 2016 with adoption of the fee on June 14, 2016. Attachments Ordinance CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 17- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.06 "FRANCHISED UTILITY ORDINANCE"TO UPDATE THE DEFINITION OF "PERSON"AND CLARIFY UTILITY RELOCATION REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, Tigard Municipal Code ("TMC") Chapter 15.06 governs use of the rights-of-way by utility operators;and WHEREAS, TMC Section 15.06.020 currently defines "person" to exclude certain special districts that the Council finds should be subject to the provisions of Chapter to ensure more effective management of the City's rights-of-way;and WHEREAS, TMC Section 15.06.260, consistent with long-standing Oregon law, requires utilities to pay the costs of relocating their utility facilities in the rights-of-way when relocation is in the public interest;and WHEREAS,clarification of TMC Section 15.06.260 is necessary to ensure that the City does not pay relocation costs on behalf of non-City utilities;and WHEREAS, the purpose of TMC Chapter 15.06 as stated in TMC Section 15.06.030, must be updated to reflect these changes and clarify the intent of the Chapter. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Sections of TMC Chapter 15.06 are amended as set forth as Exhibit A to this ordinance and are approved and adopted by City Council. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the council, signature by the mayor,and posting by the city recorder. PASSED: By vote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this day of )2017. Kelly Burgoyne,Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2017. John L. Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 17- Page 1 ExHIBITA StfAte text is deleted from the Code and underlined text is added to the Code. Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 15.06 FRANCHISED UTILITY ORDINANCE 15.6.30 Purpose The purpose and intent of this chapter is to: A. Permit and manage reasonable access to the rights-of-way of the city for utility purposes on a competitively neutral basis and conserve the limited physical capacity of those rights-of-way held in trust by the city. B. Assure that the eity's egg stieh eests C.Secure fair, just and reasonable compensation fofor the city and its residents fei.,=fig was a result of utility use, occupation and related activities roof the rights-of-way, which impose substantial impacts burdens and costs on the city and its residents, and necessitate administration maintenance and oberation of the rights-of-way by the city for the benefit of the utilities and the city's residents. GD. Comply with the provisions of the Communications Act of 1934 as they apply to local governments. Section 15.06.020 Definitions (definition of"Person") "Person" means every natural person, firm, co-partnership, association, corporation, entity or other form of organization, including government entities serviee districts. Section 15.06.020 Definitions(definition of"Telecommunications") "Telecommunications" means any service provided for the purpose of the transmission of audio, video, digital or other forms of electric or electronic signals or information without regard to the transmission protocol employed. Telecommunications includes all forms of telephone services and voice,video, data or information transport,but does not include: (1) cable service as defined in 47 U.S.C. Section 522(6); (2) open video system service, as defined in 47 C.F.R. 76; (3) telecommunications provided through a system that is owned or operated exclusively by a person or for their private use and not, directly or indirectly, for sale, resale, lease, trade, barter or other exchange of value; (4) over-the-air radio or television broadcasting to the public-at- large from facilities licensed by the Federal Communications Commission or any successor thereto; and (5) direct-to-home satellite service within the meaning of Section 602 of the Telecommunications Act. Section 15.06.260 Relocation or Removal of Facilities ORDINANCE No. 17- Page 2 The utility operator shall temporarily or permanently remove, relocate, change or alter the position of any utility facility within a right-of-way when requested to do so in writing by the city. The removal, relocation, change or alteration shall be at the utility operator's expense when the removal, relocation, change or alteration is needed because of construction, repair, maintenance, or installation of public improvements or other operations of the city within the right-of-way or is otherwise in the public interest. in the -vent `ho teme-ee, t6aeftte, ehange ot alter its fiteihties to benefit ft piivate party twAess ftfid ttntA the piivftte pfttty pays Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preclude the utility operator from requesting reimbursement or compensation from a third party pursuant to applicable laws, regulations or agreements provided that the utility operator shall timely comply with the requirements of this section regardless of whether or not it has requested or received such reimbursement or compensation. The city shall specify in the written notice the amount of time for removal, relocation, change or alteration. In the event of emergency, the utility operator shall take action as needed to resolve the emergency, and the city may use any form of communication to direct the utility operator to take actions in an emergency to protect the public safety,health and welfare. ORDINANCE No. 17- Page 3 CleanWater Services February 7, 2017 SUPPLEMENTAL T" L PACKE Tigard City Council FOR 2 _ � rvi City of Tigard (DATE OF MEETING) 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Clean Water Services' comments on proposed revisions to Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 15.06 Franchised Utility Ordinance Dear Mayor Cook and Members of the Council: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed revisions to Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 15.06 Franchised Utility Ordinance. We value our partnership with the City of Tigard. We have a nearly 50-year history of working together to safeguard the Tualatin River's health and vitality, ensure the economic success of our region and meet the needs of our community and customers. Clean Water Services (CWS)has the following comments on the proposed TMC revisions: 1. The Proposed Changes are Premature and May Conflict with ongoing Negotiations. As the City is aware, CWS and Tigard(along with other Washington County Cities)are in ongoing discussions regarding administering Rights of Way Fees. The goal is to find a methodology that is consistent both with TMC Chapter 15.06 and the IGA between CWS and City which provides the framework for delivery of Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater services to Tigard citizens and businesses. CWS and the Cities are working to finalize an agreement to bring to the CWS Board and the various City Councils, including Tigard, for approval. Depending upon the outcome of these discussions, Chapter 15.06 may need no revisions or different revisions that the ones currently proposed. In fact, current discussions regarding a potential compromise do not match up with these proposed TMC changes. This action is premature. 2. Lumping Investor-Owned Utilities with Local Government Utilities Ignores Practical and Legally Significant Differences. Changing the definition of"Person" in TMC 15.06.020 to include CWS fails to recognize the critical legal distinction between an investor-owned utility and a local government county service district. In the Key Facts and Information Summary presented to your Council on 01/10/2017, staff notes in item 1 the importance to the Oregon Supreme Court of distinguishing between a"fee" and a"tax". Left unsaid is the basis of the Court's rationale: under Oregon law, one unit of government cannot tax another without express statutory authority. There is no such limitation for an investor- owned utility. The staff comment in item 1 shows an awareness of the critical legal difference between how an investor-owned utility can be charged(taxed) as opposed to the limitation of how a local government can be charged(fee only). To include both 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway,Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 p:503.681.3600 f:503.681.3603 cleanwaterservices.org types of entities in the definition of"Person"as if there is no difference fails to recognize this important distinction. Special districts and county service districts should not be included in the definition of"Person" for purposes of TCM 15.06.020. A simple example of the problem this could cause the Council in the future: Despite the clarification of TCM 15.06.030 that the franchise fee is intended as a fee and not a tax, it is quite possible that under the principles set forth in the recent Oregon Supreme Court case of Northwest Natural Gas Co. and Rockwood PUD v. City of Gresham,the purported"fee"could be found to be a tax, depending on how the City applies the ordinance. If so, the ordinance could not be consistently applied to CWS as a"Person" and, for instance,Northwest Natural as a"Person". 3. Relocation of Facilities. It is likely that in many cases CWS will be the utility operator needing to relocate facilities pursuant to TMC 15.06.260. CWS suggests adding some process steps to facilitate the relocation of facilities, minimize cost, and ensure the least disruption to the public. The utility should receive notice of the requested relocation and an opportunity to be involved with the City and the developer to determine the most efficient, effective,and least-cost overall alternative for the public. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We recognize the City must fairly address the costs, impacts and burdens of utility infrastructure in the public ROW and stand ready to work collaboratively with the City on this question. Sincerely Bill Gaffi General Manager Cc: Marty Wine, City Manager AGENDA ITEM No. 11 Date: February 7, 2017 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: Continued Legislative Public Hearing — CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO TMC 15.06.020 PERMITTING FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS WITH SPECIAL AND COUNTY DISTRICTS This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records la ws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 11 Date: February 7, 2017 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to afimembers ofthe public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Pro onent— S eakin In Favor Opponent— ',Speaking Against) Neutral \ame,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,.\ddress&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. e,A re &Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. \ame,Address&Phone No. Name,A ress&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. \ame,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.