10/01/1992 - Packet i
99W TASK FORCE AGENDA
OCTOBER 1 , 1992
7:00 P.M.
TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
1 . Call to Order/Introductions
2. Roll Call: Clark _ Cook _ Deuth _ Gervais
Edwards _ Hawley _ Holland _ Moore _
Reilly _ Schwartz _ Schweitz
Alternates: Carver _ Hopkins _
3. Visitor's Agendas and Comments
4. Update of Interim Improvement and Subarea Analysis.
5. Discussion of 99W Concept Planning Process.
6. Adjourn
br/99WAgend.Mst
C--7cc l,c
G Ca --II
TS tM
d ol zm n f
Nor
r
Q
Id•�S�h1SS Co+�'t�tys?, � 11M��.�Izc+��t }
n 1
L ,L
c1n
�CJIA ( a GI n t to 2i n S vv� a�d,,� �s. �d�p K a�2 vt o fJ
tCt K 7'l'x 41 (U i LAS W JG ole C aAs�AYUP c f s
�A, A6t( kh
0``
"Ct� yax
CA L
Alp
99W TASK FORCE
SEPTEMBER 23 , 1991 - MINUTES
Present: Brian Moore, Bob Deuth, Steve Clark, Ron Holland, John
Cook, Joe Schweitz, John Schwartz, Jerry Edwards and Pat
Reilly.
Absent: Wendi Hawley, Jim Eddy.
Also Attending: Randy Wooley, Ed Murphy, City Staff, and Ted
Keasey of ODOT, Larry Bissett and ** of Burger King.
Mayor Edwards called the meeting to order and asked each person to
introduce themselves and their interest in serving on the
committee.
Ed Murphy, Randy Wooley, and Ted Keasey reviewed the memo from Ed
Murphy to the 99W Task Force, dated September 19th, in terms of the
mission, key issues, and background related to the 99W project.
The Task Force members generally agreed with the Draft Mission
Statements, with the additional mission of "Helping the Community
to Respond to Western Bypass Issues".
The Task Force then organized itself, with the following results:
Steve Clark, selected for Chair; Vice Chair, Bob Deuth.
The committee will follow Roberts Rules of Order. The City will
keep a record of the meetings, either by using a tape recorder or
by hiring a note taker. The committee will meet monthly on
Thursday evenings, on the third week of the month, from 7 pm to 9
pm. The next meeting is scheduled for October 17, 1991. Six
members constitute a quorum of the committee. The meetings will be
open to the public, and the City will post notices of those
meetings in its usual manner. The committee would like reminder
notices and phone calls prior to the scheduled meetings.
The committee set the agenda for the next meeting, which is:
1. Explore the assumptions being made by the State or the City
that would affect traffic volume and safety projections.
2. Review any potential short-term safety improvement as proposed
by ODOT.
..3. If time permits, discuss some design concepts for improvements
to 99W.
Ideas for future meetings include: Invite Wayne Kittleson to a
meeting to explain the proposed connection between Hall Blvd. , and
Dartmouth Street. It was decided that Ed Murphy, Steve Clark, and
Bob Deuth meeting before the next meeting to outline a tentative
work program.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9 pm.
br/99W.Min
n
1 . tz2� �j�SS��t 10 2oS tom, w, tv�T � �o�.7c �D `l7�cil ;Z23
I -
J,✓
j-'o r72c.ticL
�d MU.V- Fh X- 7 61- V1
J
4d,7 a le, ello7
96
7-c
al i�i 40 �o t �lJ /.��.t r..P!(, S74::�7s- G F'y 43Ga
u� X20 -coq`1Z
col I- I
t `7 l 2.3 ►3, jos - o
A V^ '
I S
A TUALATIN VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPORT
September 1991 =;
I; Lit
04 1991
WESTERN BYPASS UPDATE UULt Vt a U' L
Since the early 1970 ' x, local planning agencies have identified .
the need for an improved circumferential (mainly north—south)
transportation system in Washington County . In 1987 as a result of the
recommendations of the Southwest Corridor Study , Metro identified the
need for a "western bypass" to relieve congestion on Highway 217, the
only major continuous route carrying traffic in a north—south direction
through Washington County . Subsequently , a bypass was recommended for
further study in Metro ' s Regional Transportation Plan. The Oregon
Department of Transportation was asked to carry out that study.
Early, in 1990, in accordance with the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, ODOT. begpm thy, ItW- :e
" eva'T"uatng ` the` need for a new highway . To meet the NEPA requirements ,
the study also encompasses the evaluation of other transportation
alternatives such as : improved transit systems , improved existing
highways and programs to reduce demand on roadways (carpooling ,
staggered work hours , etc. ) .
The study team has spent the first year reviewing local plans ,
mapping geographic and environmental features of the area, identifying
existing traffic conditions and working with three study advisory
committees to develop goals, objectives and criteria for evaluating
potential solutions.
In January 1991 , the study advisory committees adopted a Statement
of Purpose and Need , which summarizes the first phase of the study,
including goals and objectives, major findings and technical analysis.
The Statement of Purpose and Need provides the foundation for
developing solutions.
MAJOR STUDY FINDINGS
These are the major study findings to date :
* study area population will grow by 609 by the year 2010
* study area employment will grow by 739 in the same time frame
* because of the increase in housing and employment , people will
be able to both live and work in the study area — a larger
proportion of vehicle trips will stay within the area , they will
be shorter and will be non—work trips
* the number of study area vehicle trips will increase 669
* there will be over 1 . 1 million daily study area vehicle trips in
2010 1
* close to 689 of the trips will be less than six miles in length
* 959 of the trips in the study area will be by automobile
* a small increase in transit use will occur with light rail,
mostly for travel to and from Portland
* the percent of trips made by carpool will remain about the same
(less than 39)
* geography and land use patterns are constraints to both transit
and roadway service
CURRENT STRATEGIES
The current step in the study process is the development of
strategies and examination of these strategies in the context the NEPA
requirements. The study committees are currently examining :
No—Build Strategy — funded road and highway improvements and
Westside Lightrail to 185th; this strategy will remain the same
through the study
Common Improvem ..s — road/highway and tran 1 mprovements not
yet funded by likely to be built by the year 2010
Arterial Expansion — Highway 217 widening, Murray Blvd widening &
extension, Durham & Tualatin Rd . widening , Hwy . 99W widening , TV
Hwy. widening
Transit Intensive Improvements (Light Rail) — light rail along
Hwy . 217, light rail along Barbur Blvd . , expanded bus service
Transit (HOV)/Arterial Expansion — Hwy . 217 widening ,
carpool/express bus lanes (HOV) , Durham/Tualatin Rds. widening ,
Murray Blvd . widening & extension, expanded bus service, Hwy. 99
widening
Bypass (Option A) — I-5 to Hwy . 99W, Hwy . 99W to TV Hwy. , TV Hwy.
to Hwy . 26 at Cornelius Pass Rd . or 185th, Hwy . 217 widening
Bypass (Option B) — I-5 to Hwy . 99W, Hwy . 99W to TV Hwy. , TV Hwy.
to Hwy. 26 at North Plains
What' s left to be done is development of the alternatives
evaluation criteria. From July 1991 to the end of 1991 the project
schedule includes a review of the strategies , public open houses and an
analysis of the alternatives .
In the summer of 1992 , ODOT will conduct the draft Environment
Impact Statement (EIS) ; this will not be a decision document . At the
end_ of the draft EIS proces , ODOT will work. with local jurisdictions
regarding a preferred alternative. This will take until the end of
1992. The preferred alternative will be taken through a design level
EIS .
A Message From The President. . .
A change is occurring at TVEDC, after 4 1/2 years, Mary Weber ,
Project Manager for TVEDC , will be leaving to take on a new career
challenge. Mary has accepted a position as Senior Regional Planner
with METRO in the Planning and Development Department . Mary began her
work with TVEDC in 1987 and has been responsible for the corporation' s
major research studies , as well as heading up our Information Services
Program.
It is always hard to send a good employee on to "greener
pastures" , especially when that person has made the business run
smoothly , sacrificed personal time when projects required an extra hour
here and there , and demonstrated extra—ordinary loyalty to the
corporation and the staff .
However , it is also satisfying to see someone grow professionally
and reach out to grasp new opportunities.. This is a wonderful new
opportunity for Mary.
We will miss her and cheer her on all at the same time. We will
also be glad to have her at the other end of a phone line . Good luck ,
Mary.
BULK RATE
U. IS. OSTAGE
Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation PAID
BEAVERTON,OR 47o05
10200 S. W. Nimbus, Suite G-3 PERMIT NO.
aeA
Tigard, Oregon 97223 3CY
620-1142
Patrick Reilley
City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
r
�i
99W FOLLOW-UP
LIST OF IDEAS
September 25, 1991
1. Send copy of minutes to all Task Force members.
,2AJc* d 2. Also send copy of September 19 memo to the 2 people not in
attendance.
3. Start creating a mailing list, including Larry Bissett and the
man from Burger Ring. 9
✓4. Determine whether Liz or Billie should send out agenda, and
complete the reminder calls.
,5. Meet with Bob Deuth and Steve Clark to outline a work program.
6. Call Ted Reasey, make sure he coordinates with Randy Wooley
prior to the next meeting regarding interim improvements.
V' ' Call Ted Reasy regarding methodology for outline assumptions
driving the project.
8. Coordinate with Liz on the mechanics of public relations and
information on this project.
9. Rewrite and consolidate the Mission Statement.
4'1 Reserve a room for October 17.
t� 11. Make sure that Randy Wooley gets copies of all minutes and
correspondence.
br/99Wnotes.ejm
i f
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: 99W Task Force
FROM: Ed Murphy
DATE: September 25, 1992
SUBJECT: 99W Study
Now that the Task Force has made a recommendation on interim
improvements and on "subarea analysis" , it is appropriate to turn
our attention to the broader community goals for the 99W Corridor,
and to determine how a subarea analysis fits in with the
community's goals for the corridor.
At our next meeting on October 1st it may be helpful to identify
the problem and the parameters more precisely. This memo may help
frame the issues on which I believe we need more discussion.
HOW DID PACIFIC HIGHWAY GET TO BE SUCH A MESS?
Actually, it was pretty easy. The state built a highway, and
allowed virtually unlimited local access to it. The City zoned most
everything along it commercial, and allowed development without any
frontage or parallel roads, or connected parking lots, or even
direct access from the surrounding neighborhoods into the
commercial centers. The required setbacks often did not foresee
any additional right of way being needed. In addition, the City
standards on signage and landscaping and sidewalks were not
terribly restrictive, nor was it's requirements for transit related
improvements.
As a result, we ended up with a commercial strip which is
congested, much of it with very localized trips; unsafe
(particularly for bicyclists and pedestrians) ; not very transit
oriented; and not particularly attractive visually. We also ended
up with a road that cannot be easily or inexpensively improved.
On the other hand, the road does carry a lot of traffic. . .it works
hard! And it does provide good access to a very large commercial
"linear" center. Further, some of the development along the
highway is actually quite attractive and well designed.
WHAT IS THE TYPICAL WAY THESE TYPES OF PROBLEMS ARE SOLVED?
Typically, the City, working within the regional framework,
identifies a problem area. The problem is usually defined in terms
or traffic congestion and high volume or frequency of accidents.
A solution is determined. . .say, widening and left turn barriers.
}
The problem and potential solution becomes part of the Metro
priority list. ODOT picks up the ball, and designs alternative
widening proposals. Funds are committed, and the project is
eventually built.
If the project involves removing businesses or restricting access,
however, then the businesses get upset, and the project either
moves ahead despite the protests, or the project is scrapped or
significantly reduced in scope.
The process we just went through is typical. The Regional
Transportation Plan included a project that essentially called for
widening of Pacific Highway from I-5 to Main Street. The "worst
part" of that stretch was identified for project development, funds
were committed, alternative ways to widen the highway were
identified, the business community reacted negatively to the
proposals, and the project was significantly downscoped to some
minor "interim improvements" on just a short section between Hall
and Highway 217.
Sometimes the typical approach works well. On Pacific Highway, I do
not believe it will.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM?
First of all, it depends on how one defines the problem, and what
one's goals are. If the problem is "congestion" , and the goal is
to "move traffic more quickly through Tigard", then we could solve
the problem and reach our goal by eliminating access, and widening
the highway. If the problem is "aesthetics" , and the goal was to
make Pacific Highway more visually pleasing, then we could solve
the problem and reach our goal by planting trees, burying wires,
and improving signage.
Most likely, we have more than one goal. An attractive, well
designed corridor that is congested to the point of gridlock is
obviously not an acceptable solution. A healthy business district
that is unattractive and gridlocked is not an acceptable solution.
A smooth flowing travel corridor for through traffic that results
in closure of several business, likewise, is not a viable solution.
Finally, a solution that does everything we want but would raise
the tax rate by $5.00/$1000 for 10 years to pay for that solution
is not a viable solution.
To goal is probably more like "to improve mobility and
accessibility for both people and goods, both for through traffic
and local traffic, and to do so in ways that support the business
district needs, that improve community appearance and image, and
that are cost effective and "fundable".
WHAT DO WE WANT PACIFIC HIGHWAY TO BE LIRE 10 OR 20 YEARS FROM NOW?
This is part of what I think we should discuss at our meeting, so
be thinking about it. Put it in specific terms, if you can. For
instance, I think 10 years from now I would like to be able to walk
or wheelchair from one end of Pacific Highway to the
other. . .safely! I would like to drive through smoothly and quickly
most of the time, but would be willing to accept delays ( 'E' level
of service) during peak hours. I would like to have alternative
routes available to me to get through town, or even to some of the
stores along Pacific Highway, without even getting on the highway.
I would like substantially less overhead wiring, and more
landscaping. If I choose to take a bus, I would like to be able to
wait for the bus in a bus shelter.
What do ,you want?
DO WE HAVE THE TECHNIQUES AND THE FUNDS TO ACCOMPLISH WHATEVER IT
IS WE DECIDE WE WANT TO DO?
For traffic flow and safety. We could look at widening in selected
locations; signal timing; elimination of some unnecessary driveways
or even streets, or consolidation of driveways for separate
businesses; alternative parallel roads; median barriers;
intersection improvements and transportation demand management
programs.
For pedestrian facilities. obviously, installation of sidewalks
wherever there are none; replacing asphalt sidewalks with concrete
sidewalks; removing obstacles, like fire hydrants and power poles
(or widening the sidewalk around the obstacles) ; and creating safer
crosswalk areas.
For transit supportive facilities. At least, building and
maintaining decent transit shelters, and providing bus pull out
lanes at bus stops.
For business development and redevelopment. Wherever widening is
needed, develop a program for relocation of businesses and
redevelopment of the property. Combining driveways or joining
together adjacent parking lots may improve the economic vitality of
the certain businesses.
For design improvements. Consider a program that would bury at
least some of the wiring; create a street tree program; create and
enforce tighter regulations on signs and landscaping of parking
lots (especially between the parking lot and highway; develop new
building design standards, at least in terms of setbacks and
orientation.
There may be many other programs. . .some public, some private
oriented; some capital intensive, some "soft" programs, like
education, store hours, transit ridership incentives.
DON'T WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE SUBAREA ANALYSIS IS DONE BEFORE WE
KNOW HOW WIDE PACIFIC HIGHWAY WILL BE. . .AND THEREFORE, WHAT
PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS ARE APPROPRIATE?
Again, depending on how we define the problem, we may or may not
have to wait. It seems to me that we should find a way to combine
the subarea analysis with a "corridor" plan of some type. Perhaps
we should even ask that the subarea analysis look at the problem in
reverse. Instead of asking how wide does Pacific Highway have to be
to accommodate future growth, we could determine that it is a
community goal not to widen Pacific Highway to more than four lanes
plus turn lanes, and see what we would need to do to make sure it
would still function at no worse than level D in 2015.
WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW, AND HOW DO WE GET STARTED?
Work with ODOT staff to:
1. Def ine the problems that we want to address (being careful not
to confuse the solution with the problem) , and describe the
desired results or outcome of the corridor study.
2. Determine the scope of a study.
3. Line up the resources necessary to complete the study.
4. Develop an existing conditions inventory and identify
opportunities and constraints.
5. Initiate a conceptual corridor study together with the subarea
analysis.
ejm/PaciHywy.Mem