Hearings Officer Packet - 08/14/1986 - Tri-County Metro Trans i�
•
I .
HEARING OFFICER DECISION
8/86 Tri-County Metropolitan -`
Transportation District of Oregon
CU 3-86
CITY OF TIGARD
Washington County. Oregon
NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER
1 . Concerning Case Number(s) : CU 3-86
2. Name of Owner: TR]-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT OF OR.
3. Name of Applicant: Same
Address 4012 SE 17th City Portland State OF Zip 97202
4. Location of Property:
Address 8960 SW Commercial
Legal Description 2S1 2AA lots 4901 & 4800
S. Nature of Application: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
construction of an off-street transit Center in the CBD (Central Business
District).
6. Action: Approval as requested
XX Approval with conditions
Denial
1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall
and wiled to:
XX The applicant & owners
77Owners of record within the required distance
The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization
XX Affected governmental agencies
8. Fina, Decision:
THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON September 9, 1986 UNLESS AN APPEA'. IS F.LLSD.
The adopted findings of fact. decision, and statement of coniition can be
obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall
Blvd. , P.O. Box 23391, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
9 Appeal:
Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with
18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal
may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent.
The deadline for filing of an appeal is Ain P.N. Sept. 9, 1986
10. Questions: If you have any questions, pleas. call the City of Tigard
Planning Department, 639-4171 .
0257P
BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION)
FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ) No.
CONSTRUCT A TRANSIT CENTER;
Tri-Met, Applicant. ) CU 3-86
The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer
at the regularly scheduled meeting of August 14 , 1986, and was
continued for additional hearings to August 27, 1986, at the
Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room, in Tigard, Oregon; and
The applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct
a transit center as part of the Tri-Met system, property located
on SW Commercial St. , more specifically described as Tax Lots
4800 and 4901, Map 2S1 2AA, City of Tigard, County of Washington,
State of Oregon; and
The Hearings Officer conducted public hearings on August 14th
and August 27th, at which time testimony, evidence and the Planning
Department Staff Report were rectived; and
The Hearings Officer adopts the findings of fact and conclu-
sions contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached
hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein,
and the Hearings Officer further adopts the findings of fact and
conclusions contained in the report from Kittelson & Associates
which report is marked as an exhibit in the record and is incorpo-
rated by reference herein.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that CU 3-86 be and hereby
is approved subject to the following conditions:
Page 1 - CU 3-86
1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR
TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS.
2. Applicant shall construct a City standard full half-street
improvement along SW Commercial Street; said improvement shall be
constructed to minor collector street standards (40 feet new curb
to existing curb minimum) and shall conform to a horizontal and ver-
tical alignment to be approved by the Engineering Division. The
design may be a modification of the preliminary L. I .D. design of
record for SW Commercial Street, to facilitate blending of the pro-
posed improvement with existing conditions. Concrete curb, side-
walks, entry-exit ways, and street pavement (and crushed rock) ,
lighting and pedestrian vehicle marking is required; final design
to be approved by the Engineering Division. Final design shall
include street structural evaluation by Washington County's C.B.E.
method. Standard minor collector structural requirements may not
be sufficient.
3. Bus parking within 36 feet of the curb on the opposite
side of Commercial Street shall not be permitted. Applicant shall
provide the Engineering Division with a 3 lane street marking plan,
from Main Street to applicant ' s southerly boundary, if bus parking
will be between 36 and 40 feet of the curb on the opposite side of
Commercial Street.
4 . Five (5) sets of plan-profile public improvement con-
struction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate,
stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing
all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering
Division for approval.
Page 2 - CU 3-86
a
5. Sanitary sewer plan-profile public improvement construction
plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by
a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed
public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Division
for approval.
6. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not
commence until after the Engineering Division has issued approved
public improvement plans. The Division will require posting of a
100% Performance Bond, the payment of a permit fee and a streetlight
fee. Also, the execution of a street opening permit shall occur
prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public
improvement plans. SEE THE ENLLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MORE SPECIFIC
INFORMATION REGARDING FEE SCHEDULES, BONDING, AND AGREEMENTS.
7 . If storm water is to be directed onto the Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain a permit from
Southern Pacific for outfall of stormwater into this right-of-way.
A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City prior to issuance
of any approved plans or permits.
8. A revised site/landscaping plan shall be submitted for
Planning Director's approval which includes the following :
a. Bus parking and circulation plan approved by the
Engineering Division.
b. Location and design of bicycle parking spaces
(minimum of two) .
c. Adequate pedestrian circulation.
9. Landscaping material shown on the approved landscaping
plan shall be installed prior to occupancy.
Page 3 - CU 3-86
10. A sign permit must be obtained for all signs that are
moved or placed on the property or the building (contact Deborah
Stuart 639-4171) .
11. Tax Lots 4800 and 4901 shall be combined into one parcel
if the addition to the existing building causes it to straddle the
property line.
12. This approval shall be valid for one year from the date
of the final order.
13. The Ceparture patterns at the Tigard Transit Center
shall allow for the street bay buses to leave prior to the other
buses to provide good sight distance for both bus drivers and
motorists on Commercial Street.
DATED this day of August, 1986.
HEARINGS OFFICER
APPROVED:
/
BETH MASOIQ
Page 4 - CU 3-86
1
TRI-COUNTY
METROPOLITAN 4 U
TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT
Ey.A.(64-
I�LR)J
OF OREGON
TRI-MET
4012 SE 17th AVENUE
RF,(cz,JET(\vi
PORTLAND.OREGON 07202
August 26, 1986 _! li f,, .
l;I l Y OF I I�HKD
Keith Liden PLANNING DEPT,
Senior Planner
City of Tigard
Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Traffic Study for CU3-86, Tigard Transit Center
Dear Keith:
Pursuant to the Hearings Officer's request, Tri-Met has completed an analysis
of traffic impacts associated with the proposed Tigard Transit Center. As
requested, particular attention was paid to potential safety or congestion
problems on Commercial Street at the Transit Center and to potential congestion
problems at the intersection of Main and Commercial.
The attached report, prepared by Gary Katsion, a traffic engineer affiliated
with Kittleson and Associates, indicates that the net impact of the Transit
Center on operation of either Main or Commercial Street is not significant.
There are and will continue to be adequate gaps in Commercial Street traffic
to allow safe ingress and egress for buses. The intersection of Main and
Comnercial was also evaluated using data gathered for Tigard's current study
of downtown streets and projected future volumes. That analysis concludes
that the p.m. peak hour level of service is unchanged with addition of the
Transit Center. Even assuming a "worst case" scenario, Main and Commercial
would operate at an acceptable level of service in the year 2005. This lack
of impact is explained in part by the small net increase in turning movements
over current peak hour bus operations.
In conclusion, I believe the attached analysis speaks clearly to the potential
for tral.fic-related problems (or lack thereof) associated with the Tigard Transit
Center.
If you have any c •lstions about the report, please contact me at 238-4905.
Sincerely
W
Jbe alsh
Pdoject Planner
.1W: 11
cc: meth Mason, Hearings Officer
Randy Clarno, City Engineer's Office
1/4,
1 ,
L7i KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES
\\` TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
512 S W BRGADWAV • PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • 150312245230
MEMORANDUM
August 26, 1986
TO: Mr. Joe Walsh, Tri-Met
FROM: Gary D. Katsion, P.E.
SUBJECT: Tigard Transit Center, Commercial Street , Tigard, Ore .
Traffic Impact Analysis, Project No. 63 .00
Kittelson & Associates has reviewed the proposed site plan, pre-
pared by Wilsey & Ham (July 1986) , and visited the site for the
proposed Tri-Met Tigard Transit Center on Commercial Street , just
south of Main Street . A traffic engineering analysis of the ex-
pected bus operations at the site egress driveway and the Main
Street/Commercial Street intersection was conducted to identify
potential traffic impacts . The specific issues discussed in this
memorandum include:
o Site-generated traffic;
o Existing traffic operations;
o Bus operating characteristics;
o Peak hour level of service/capacity analysis;
o Sight distance requirements .
l.le traffic engineering analysis was conducted following review
of the City of Tigard Hearing Officer comments with you on August
19 , 1986. The American Association of State Higlh.�y and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets , 1984 , and the Institute of Transportation
( ITE) Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook were: util-
ized in the preparation of this memorandum.
Conclusions :
o The proposed Tigard Transit Center is not expected to
impact the traffic operations of the adjacent streets .
The p.m. peak hour level of service at the Main
Street/Commercial Street intersection will be the same
with or without the proposed site under present and
future ( 2005) traffic volume conditions .
1
o The existing stop sign control of the Main
Street/Commercial Street intersection will provide for
acceptable level of service operations for the existing
and future traffic volumes with the proposed site. The
1986 level of service is expected to be "C" and the
year 2005 level of service was calculated to be "D"
with the proposed transit center.
o The expected gaps in vehicle flow along Commercial
Street w. 11 easily accommodate entering/exiting of
buses at the site access driveways .
o The site plan allow; for a minimum of 250 feet of un-
!mpeded sight distance for bus drivers leaving the
site. This distance provides a safe stopping sight
distance for motorists traveling at 35 miles per hour .
It is recommended that the departure of the buses from
the two street bays occur before the remaining buses .
This recommended bus operations procedure will greatly
increase the site distance for both bus drivers and
Commercial Street motorists .
Site Generated Traffic
The proposed Tri-Met Transit Center is expected to have 39 bus
trips during the p.m. peak huur ( 4 : 30 to 5 : 30 p.m. ) . There will
be en increase of eight bus movements at the Main Street/
Commercial Street intersection.
Existing Traffic Operations
The existing p.m . p•ak hour turn movements at the Main Street/
Commercial Street intersection were compiled by Robert Keech,
P. E. , Inc . during an inventory of traffic volumes on Main Street
in July, 1986. The peak hour was found to occur between 4 : 30
p.m. and 5 : 30 p.m. Figure 1 shows the existing volumes rounded
to the nearest 5 vehicles .
An intersection capacity analysis was conducted with the existing
volumes and the stop sign control on the Commercial Street
approach. Both Main Street approaches operate at level of ser-
vice "A" , while the Commercial Street approach operates at level
of service "C" .
Levels of Service for a particular roadway or intersection is a
qualitative measure of various factors which influence traffi::
operations . The factors which influence the traffic operations
include speed, travel time , traffic interruptions, freedom to
maneuver, driver comfort , safety and vehicle operating costs.
Six levels of service have been established and are designated by
the letters A through A, providing the best to worst service in
S W Main Street
,, 36r)�
,b) .....9 t1
J \ss.N%.............1
cn
cc 1
W
t
Z
a
F
cn
4
e
E
0
4
0) S
1986 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
EXISTING BUS OPERATIONS
Fiyul
Tri-Met Tigard TC 1
August 1986
IR
1
terms of driver satisfaction. For signalized intersections, the
level of service is generally evaluated in terms of an equivalent
range of a quantitative measure, the volume/capacity ratio. The
level of service D, with a corresponding v/c ratio of 0. 8 - 0 .9,
or better is the desired level of service for design by the City
of Tigard. For unsignalized intersections, the level of service
is evaluated in terms of reserve capacity at ,each approach to the
intersection. The level of service E, with a corresponding
reserve capacity of 0 to 100 vehicles, is acceptable for the
minor street approaches, if signal warrant conditions are not
met .
A vehicle gap analysis was conducted by Kittelson & Associates on
August 22 , 1986, during the p.m. peak hour. All gaps between
passing vehicles in both directions along Commercial Street were
noted . As detailed in the next section, vehicle gaps greater
than eleven seconds were identified as being adequate for safe
bus exiting operations .
A total of 115 gaps greater than eleven seconds were recorded and
totaled more than 50 minutes of possible unimpeded movements from
the site.
Bus Operating Characteristics
The proposed location of the Tigard Transit Center will require
buses that use Main Street to turn left out of the site . This
left turn movement will be made by 16 buses during the p.m. peak
hour . It is essential to the safe operations of the facility
that there is adequate gaps in the existing and future traffic
flows along Commercial Street .
The time it takes for an articulated bus to negotiate a left turn
from the proposed site has been calculated at 8 . 5 seconds .
Figure 2 illustrates the distance traveled during the 8 . 5
seconds. The bus was assumed to be stopped at the driveway prior
to turning and the acceleration rate utilized was 3 .0 miles per
hour per second .
An additional 2 . 5 seconds was added to allow for perception and
reaction time of the bus driver. Therefore, and eleven second
gap in the Commercial Street vehicle flow is required for an
articulated bus to safely enter Commercial Street .
With over 50 minutes of gap time available under the existing
traffic volumes conditions , there will be no unnecessary delays
to bus movements from the site.
Peak Hour Operations With the Transit Center
Figure 3 shows the 1986 p.m. peak hour turn movements at the Main
Street/Commercial Street intersection with the proposed transit
l
1.1 .111111111111
/
/ / PRO vo_E D
/ / r/GQk'h
TRAN.::-/r
) I r
(- -s.- .._\
I I
I I •
I I`
--
- l - l \
13 \ \ mr
COMMEQG/AL STREET
> C /60 -- ,, I
C SI
".•
s
b 1 --
C cm C
1 (f 1
ca m T time- r u+reel Tbr ayLtkkekcet bus //' IGO*2 1 1
wLAwe- C� ■ c1Cl.G1eN,Ik1o91
a to Atli nit. t) �/ ca.
3.0 Mme_
P i. •
—4 W
n cCA - 4,4 ct/sem'
0u. TO t• S,S f. .c
Aira n ws►oR7RTou I TeArric 1-GdAvov+ tw+e - Z.S KL
n XI EN616JCiRiU4, NM+edmK
c) Du�v� ....TT • II.O SGCry�1 S ii,
m g
S W Main Street
50 Ar— 80
r
to 2
Jc. 1
N
F
F � N
•
o 4
df
1986 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
WITH TRANSIT CENTER _ al Tri-Met Tigard TC Figure
3
Aupuet 1988 ,--
1 �
center but operations. The level of service on all three
approaches remains the same as the existing conditions. Level of
service "A" on the Main Street approaches and "C" on the
Commercial Street approach .
The future (Year 2005) traffic volumes on Main Street and
Commercial Street were not available from METRO. The regional
transportation model is not currently set up with these streets
as part of the network. METRO, however, did have projections for
Pacific Highway in the area that indicated an annual growth rate
of about one percent .
Since the future growth of traffic along Main Street and
Commercial Street will be directly related to currently undeter-
mined redevelopment of existing parcels , a one percent annual
growth rate seemed reasonable for this analysis . The existing
traffic volumes were increased by approximately 21 percent to
estimate the "ear 2005 traffic volumes . Figure 4 illustrates the
future p.m. peak hour traffic volumes .
The Year 2005 level of service at the Main Street.'Commercial
Street intersection was calculated to be "A" on the Main Street
approaches and "U" on the Commercial Street approach. Intersec-
tion capacity worksheets have been provided at the end of this
memorandum.
Sight Distance Requirements
Figure 5 illustrates that bus drivers leaving the proposed site
have approximately 250 feet of sight distance looking northbound
along Commercial Street with a bus parked in the street-side bay.
This is the minimum distance needed for a safe stopping sight
distance for vehicle speeds of 15 mph.
It is recommended that prr;.eaures and scheduling of the departure
patterns at the Tigard ".'ransit Center allow for the street bay
buses to leave prior co the other buses . The departure of the
street buses will result in very good sight distance for both bus
drivers and motorists on Commercial Street .
r---- .._,..
S W Main StrHt
4(15----•- 1 �
‘0---... r— 95
1 (
Rl, W S
t J1 .
co
W rn `1
t 1
w
Z
a
F
__ _,► ai
a
•
E
E
U
AO
2005 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
WITH TRANSIT CENTER
Tri-Met Tigard TC I Figur
P Uri,
August 1988 4 f
' 1 I
1 IL I - lilt '1 '-'4 W
1 .,vW 1r
%tt I
illi 41 I ! o
l'*- i 1 ......3 , t,..i?":1,--..11..s.1::-.-.404.,*:.kri..5.,
I . w
, ....:., ....,.,.;.;:.:14.4cv, .. -t,tt....4.,ii.t.f.-:1;
, ....,. ...:,.....:,...:: 1 .....„.7...41i,t- -,,.. .
i
Li
Il 'f,•. . , 1 _ .y.. tom' 2
7.;!'),„,?, .,_4' ;r.' ' % "
11)
::,,„&. ....44 - . 0 k)
[lf •I t 2fk tx• I Q
re :,•4• �= . OWE w J J)
.0....;...1!.. . r;.Y
i i 1 islk. -';' 'zi I"! ;. .4' '' ,j
I I !i. W • .j,'r.'1,- +S 'wL,:i_�f: I::• 1.� .O ;i 1
1 ? A' i t
.t, I •
bffarriS W---
W lz�S N
kg-
f u l K ..'
Ujill 1
ft-
CY
w c)\ ,et, . s•43..:!. gi,••. ::-''', 1 u- F--- a•
7?*‘•;409"..fid: 1 • :.-J iSi <
�• I-1-O
77 • •• ' r ¢ I
ii
V/ 1 ^ �y.
i♦ _ 1 _5,12 .;yT7. JJF��t Ike
=` �`• � I
2 :Kr'K, •r : .' ' , ,y• •
•
I I 1 I �, ,O.; - • 0
ZO J I
r ..
i_ Z N 00zO
, ,
iti>- --. l'.1
cn
STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE
Figure K,
Tri—Met Tigard TC 5
August 1988
L
This is a 3 - Way intersection
1 ) Major street is : MAIN STREET 2) Minor street is : COMMERCIAL STREET
3) Volumes 4) Sight adjustments
5) Traffic Composition on major 6) Traffic Composition on minor
7) Speed = 30 8) Number of lanes = 2 50% of 3 impeding
9) Population >= 250,000 10 ) Percentages of
11 ) Shared lanes : None traffic In lanes : 100)'. of 2 nn right
12) Peak Hour Factor = 1 .00 major minor
13) Corner A: Stop , no Accel . lane , normal radius MC 0 0
14 ) Corner B+ no right turn lane , normal turn Traffic Cars 96 95
15) Corner C : Comp . SU/RV 2 1
16) Corner 0 ' Comb . 2 4
17) Grades : e = +0 , f = +0 18) Exit to DOS
Enter # to change , 0 to recalculate , 18 to quit :
move . 2 3 4 5 7 9
vol . 350 45 75 360 60 125
'vol . 350 45 77 360 c,3 131
sight * 0 +0 . 00 0 +0 .00 +0 .00
cap . * 0 905 * 337 n18
xcap . 0 0 827 * 274 37
LOS * * A * C A
I98c, TRAFFIC - BQS
c ERATkc>►..1S
This is a 3 - Way intersection
1 ) Major street is : MAIN STREET 2) Minor street is : COMMERCIAL STREET
3) Volumes 4 ) Sight adjustments
5) Traffic Composition on major 6) Traffic Composition on minor
7) Speed = 30 8) Number of lanes = 2 507. of 3 impeding
9) Population >= 250 ,000 10) Percentages of
11 ) Shared lanes : None traffic in lanes : 100% of 2 on right
12 ) Peak Hour Factor = 1 . 00 major minor
13) Corner A: Stop , no Accel . lane , normal radius MC 0 0
14 ) Corner B: no right turn lane , normal turn Traffic_ Cars 96 95
15) Corner C : Comp . SU/RV 2 1
16) Corner 0 : Com 2 4
17) Grades . _ +0 , f = +0 18) Exit to DOS
Enter * to change , 0 to recalculate , 18 to quit :
move . 2 3 4 5 7 9
vol . 345 50 80 355 65 130
•vol . 345 50 82 355 68 136
sight * * +0 . 00 * +0 . 00 +0 .00
cap . * * 905 * 338 821
xcap . * * 822 * 270 685
LOS * * A * C A
1980 TRAvFIC - wcti TIGARt .
TRAIJStT CENTER
( (
This is a 3 - Way intersection
1 ) Major street is : MAIN STREET 2) Minor street is : COMMERCIAL STREET
3) Volumes 4) Sight adjustments
5) Traffic Composition o iajor 6) Traffic Composition on minor
7) Speed = 30 8) Number of lanes = 2 50% of 3 impeding
9) Population >= 250,000 10) Percentages of
11 ) Shared lanes : None traffic in lanes : 100% of 2 on right
12 ) Peak Hour Factor = 1 .00 major minor
13) Corner A: Stop, no Accel . lane, normal radius MC 0 0
14) Corner B: no right turn lane, normal turn Traffic Cars 96 95
15) Corner C : Comp. SU/RV 2 1
16) Corner D: Comb. 2 4
17 ) Grades :e = +0, f - +0 18) Exit to DOS
Enter S to change, 0 to recalculate, 18 to quit :
move. 2 3 4 5 7 9
vol . 415 60 96 430 80 160
evol . 415 60 98 430 84 167
sight • • +0.00 • +0.00 +0.00
cap. • * 833 • 262 755
xcap. • * 735 • 178 587
IROS • * A * D A
1VSOSVX C-WTEP-
1
STAFF REPORT (WIND() ITEM 2 1
THURSDAY, AUGUST 14, 1986 / iql
TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER • `(F) t/
TIGARD CITY HALL - 1OWN HALL Ex% . 1 6 I
13125 SW HALL BLVD.
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
A. FACTS
1 . General Information
CASE: Conditional Use CU 3-86
REQUEST: To construct a transit center as part of the Tri-Met system.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION. Central Business District
ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD (Central Business District)
APPLICANT: Tri-County Metropolitan OWNER: Same
Transportation District
of Oregon
4012 SE 17th Ave.
Portland, OR 97202
LOCATION: 8960 SW Commercial Street (WCTM 2S1 2AA lot 4800 & 4901)
2. Background Information
Conditional Use approval (CU 6-82) was granted by the Planning
Commission in March, 1982 . Tri- 'tet did not proceed because of delays in
property acquisition and construction funding.
3 . Vicinity Information
All surrounding properties are zoned CBD. A commercial/warehouse
building lies to the south, a bank and office building are to the north,
retail and office buildings are on the opposite side of Commercial
Street, and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way abuts the western
property line.
4. Site Information and Pn_posal Description
I The applicant proposed to remove the Tigard Auto Body building and
construct a bus transit center. The Greyhound building which also
includes a barber shop, will remain and be incorporated as part of the
center. The site plan features one--way circulation through the site and
bus parking and passenger drop-off on Commercial Fltreet.
STAFF REPORT -- CU 3-86 - PAGE 1
5. Agency and NPO Comments
The Engineering Division has the following comments:
a. The storm water facilities in Main Street may not be adequate to
accommodate full development in the downtown area and Commercial
Street storm water facilities are virtually non-existent. If the
railroad facilities are to be utilized as proposod, permission of
the railroad will be required and the adequacy of downstream
facilities must be shown.
b. In 1974, an L.I.D. was proposed for Commercial Street but did not
materialize. The street improvements on the opposite side of the
street were constructed in a manner consistent with the design
developed for the L.I.D.
c. Parking restrictions will be necessary and the delineation between
public right-of-way avid the Tri-Met property must be clearly
maintained.
d. Due to the amount of anticipated pedestrian activity adequate
street lighting is important.
e. Commercial Street is designated as a minor collector street which
is intended to accommodate two or three traffic la'-ies . The option
for a third lane must be maintained requiring that rio parking
(including buses) be permitted within the 40 foot wide curb to
curb street section.
The Building Inspection Division has no objection to the request.
NPO N 1 supports the proposal, but concerns were raised regarding
parking enforcement, problems in the downtown area caused by drivers
parking all day .
The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District states that all buildings
must be within 250 feet of a fire hydrant.
No other comments have been received.
I1 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
It appears ths,L. with modification, the proposed transit center will be
compatible with the Conditional Use approval criteria in Section
18. 130.040(a) of the Community Development Code, The design is
compatible with surrcunding development and applicable standards for
building height and setbacks, lot coverage, landscaping materials,
parking for tie barber shop/bus depot, and access have been met.
Assuming the disposal of storm water can be accomplished, public
facilities are adequate to serve the center. The proposal is consistent
with Comprehensive Plan policies 8.2 . 1 and 8 .2.2 which call for the
promotion of public transportation.
STAFF REPORT - CU 3-86 - PAGE 2
The primary issue that must be resolved is related to the parking of
buses within the street section for Commercial Street. Vision of bus
drivers will be inhibited somewhat by buses parked on the street but
more importantly, the necessary number and width of travel and turning
lanes will be prevented by the proposed design. In order to avoid this
problem, buses cannot be allowed to park within the required 40 foot
street width.
The relocation of the bus parking which will maintain a 40 foot wide
street section may cause design problems related to bus and pedestrian
circulation as well as providing the required amount of landscaping.
Tri-'let has indicated that the possibility exists to obta',, a long term
lease for additional area along the rear of the site. It is the opinion
of the staff that minor modifications to the site plan can be made in
accordance with Section 18. 130.060 of the Code that are consistent with
the concept presented.
It is recognized that this transit center is intended for passenger
drop-off and transfers and not for a park and ride facility. As a
result, parking is only provided for the Greyhound terminal and barber
shop. Although long term car parking is not provided, some bicycle
parking facilities should be installed. No specific standard is
contained in the Code for this use, but observation of bicycles chained
to transit shelters downtown suggest that at least two spaces should be
provided. To eliminate the threat of vandalism, the provision of
enclosed spaces similar to those at the Rarbur Transit Center is
recommended.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff
recommends approval of CU 3-86 subject to the following conditions:
1 . UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS.
2. Applicant shall construct a City standard full half-street
improvement along SW Commercial Street; said improvement shall be
constructed to minor collector street standards (40 feet new curb
to existing curb) and shall conform to a horizontal and vertical
alignment to be approved by the Engineering Division. The design
may be a modification of the preliminary L.I.D. design of record
for SW Commercial Street, to facilitate blending of the proposed
improvement with existing conditions . Concrete curb, sidewalks,
entry-exit ways, and street pavement (and crushed rock), lighting
and pedestrian vehicle marking is required; final design to be
approved by the Engineering Division. Final design shall include
street structural valuation by Washington County' s C.B.E. method.
Standard minor collector structural requirements may not be
sufficient.
3 . Bus parking within the 40 foot curb to curb minor collector street
section shall not be permitted.
STAFF REPORT - CU 3--86 - PAGE 3
4. Five (5) sets of plan--profile public improvement construction
plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by
a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed
public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Division
for approval .
5. Sanitary sewer plan-profile public improvement construction plans
and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a
Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed
public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Division
for approval .
6. Constructed of proposed public improvements shall not commence
until after the Engineering Division has issued approved public
improvement plans . The Division will require posting of a 100%
Performance Bond, the payment of a permit fee and a streetlight
fee, Also, the execution of a street opening permit shall occur
prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public
improvement plans. SEE THE ENCLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MORE SPECIFIC
INFORMATION REGARDING FEE SCHEDULES, BONDING, AND AGREEMENTS.
7. If storm water is to be directed onto the Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain a permit from
Southern Pacific for outfall of stormwater into this
right-of-way. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City
prior to issuance of any approved plans or permits
8. A revised site/landscaping plan shall be submitted for Planning
Director' s approval which includes the following:
a. Bus parking and circulation plan approved by the Engineering
Division.
b. location and design of bicycle parking spaced (minimum of
two) .
c . Adequate pedestrian circulation.
9 landscaping material shown on the approved landscaping plan shall
be installed prior to occupancy .
10 A sign permit must be obtained for all signs that are moved or
placed on the property or the building (Contact Deborah Stuart
639 -4171) .
11 Tax Lots 4800 and 4901 shall be combined into one parcel if the
addition to the existing building causes it to straddle the
property line.
12. This approval shall be valid for one year from the date of the
final order.
r°44° )flW.$4e1
)i
PREPA E BY: Keith Liden APPROVED BY: William A. Monahan
Senior Planner Director of Planning b
Development
(dj/113)
8l