HomeMy WebLinkAboutTile Flat Analysis Matrix_draft 6-10-2025Tigard River Terrace 2.0 - Tile Flat Extension Evaluation (Draft 6-10-2025)
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4
A1. Total Vehicle Miles Traveled
Ideal Definition: Total VMT decreases on the Arterial and
Primary and Secondary Street network* as the RT 2.0
Primary and Secondary Street network is constructed and
accommodates more local trips.
Total VMT change from no-build: -0.5%Total VMT change from no-build: +1.0%Total VMT change from no-build: -0.4%Total VMT change from no-build: -0.3%
A2. VMT on the Primary and Secondary Street Network
Ideal Definition: The RT 2.0 Primary and Secondary Street
network* serves local trips and discourages regional cut-
through traffic.
Share of Total VMT for RT 2.0 Trips: 92%Share of Total VMT for RT 2.0 Trips: 47%Share of Total VMT for RT 2.0 Trips: 62%Share of Total VMT for RT 2.0 Trips: 48%
B. Quantity of Travel
Ideal Definition: Forecasted average daily traffic volumes
on the Primary and Secondary Street network are
consistent with that of a Collector through a residential
neighborhood, with the ideal condition being under 6,000
ADT
Lowest overall ADT volumes ADT volumes are higher along Mountainside Way
compared to Scenarios 1 and 3
Slighly higher ADT volumes along Mountainside
Way compared to Scenario 1, but otherwise
similiar
Highest overall ADT volumes
C. Intersection Capacity
Ideal Definition: Intersections are forecasted to be less
congested once the RT 2.0 Primary and Secondary Street
network is constructed, with intersections forecasted to
operate with a v/c ratio that is at or below the current
0.99 mobility target
One intersection exceeds the current mobility
target. This scenario results in the highest v/c
ratios on Scholls Ferry and competitive or lower
v/c ratios along Roy Rogers.
Two intersections exceed the current mobility
target. This scenario results in improved
operations along Scholls Ferry with some
degradation of operations at the Roy Rogers &
Bull Mountain intersection.
One intersection exceeds the current mobility
target. This scenario results in similar operations
on Scholls Ferry to Scenario 1, improved
operations along parts of Roy Rogers, and some
degradation of operations at the Roy Rogers &
Perth intersection.
One intersection exceeds the current mobility
target. This scenario results in improved
operations along Scholls Ferry with some
degradation of operations at the Roy Rogers
intersections with Bull Mountain and Perth.
D. Travel Time
Ideal Definition: Forecasted travel times for regional
trips* decrease by more than one half of a traffic signal
cycle (more than 30 seconds) once the RT 2.0 Primary and
Secondary Street network is constructed.
6.91 minutes (-11 seconds from no-build)6.88 minutes (-13 seconds from no-build)7.07 minutes (-2 seconds from no-build)6.63 minutes (-28 seconds from no-build)
Criteria
1.
V
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
N
e
t
w
o
r
k
Tigard River Terrace 2.0 - Tile Flat Extension Evaluation (Draft 6-10-2025)
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4Criteria
A. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Ideal Condition: Minimal investment to create BLTS 1.Lowest investment to achieve BLTS 1 Achieves BLTS 1 with some costs for median
crossings at all locations
Achieves BLTS 1 with some costs for additional
median crossings
Achieves BLTS 1 with some costs for median
crossings at all locations
B. Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress
Ideal Condition: Minimal investment to create PLTS 1.Lowest investment to achieve PLTS 1 Achieves PLTS 1 with some costs for additional
median crossings
Achieves PLTS 1 with some costs for additional
median crossings
Achieves PLTS 1 with some costs for additional
median crossings
C. Connectivity
Ideal Condition: high performance in local and regional
connectivity and walkshed coverage.
Provides sufficient connectivity for development
and good walkshed coverage
Provides additional local and regional
connectivity and walkshed coverage
Provides additional local connectivity and
walkshed coverage
Provides the most local and regional connectivity
and walkshed coverage
D. Vulnerable Road User Safety
Ideal Condition: vulnerable road user crash exposure is
zero.
Lowest VRU crash exposure VRU crash exposure is higher than Scenario 1 VRU crash exposure is somewhat higher than
Scenario 1
VRU crash exposure is considerably higher than
Scenario 1
E. Future Transit Service
Ideal Condition: high performance in base coverage, route
options, and minimal transit delay.
Primary route provides good coverage and
lowest traffic volumes minimize delays
Alternative routes available but may reduce
coverage. Traffic volumes may result in some
transit delays
Alternative routes could provide additional
residential coverage but reduce commercial
exposure.
Alternative routes could reduce commercial
exposure. Traffic volumes may result in transit
delays
A. GHG & Emissions
Ideal Condition: cut-through VMT is minimized (zero)Lowest potential for emissions in RT 2.0 Emissions potential is considerably higher than
Scenario 1
Emissions potential is somewhat higher than
Scenario 1
Emissions potential is considerably higher than
Scenario 1
B. Natural Resource Impacts
Ideal Condition: minimal impact to streams, trees,
wetlands, and impervious surface
Fewest stream crossings, some impact to trees,
lowest impervious surface
Additional stream crossing, some impact to trees,
potential wetlands impact, increased impervious
surface
Additional stream crossing, some impact to trees,
increased impervious surface
Two additional stream crossings, some impact to
trees, potential wetlands impact, highest
impervious surface
C. Livability Impacts of Regional Vehicle Trips
Ideal Condition: cut-through traffic is minimized (zero
vpd)
Lowest cut-through traffic and a small proportion
of street volume
Cut-through traffic is considerably higher than
Scenario 1 and high proportion of street volume
Some increase in cut-through traffic compared to
Scenario 1 and relatively small portion of street
volume
Cut-through traffic is considerably higher than
Scenario 1 and high proportion of street volume3.
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
/
L
i
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
2.
M
u
l
t
i
m
o
d
a
l
N
e
t
w
o
r
k
Tigard River Terrace 2.0 - Tile Flat Extension Evaluation (Draft 6-10-2025)
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4Criteria
A. Support to Commercial Areas
Ideal Condition: maximize traffic passing by and walkshed
coverage for commercial areas
Provides highest overall pass-by traffic but lower
walkshed coverage
Provides highest pass-by traffic for RRBM and
good walkshed coverage
Provides best performance for SFMW but lower
pass-by traffic for RRBM
Provides best performance for RRBM but lower
pass-by traffic for SFMW
B. Land Use & Development Feasibility
Ideal Condition: least impact to development with costs
contained to those supported by development
Costs can be supported by development,
potential impact on development yield on
Vandermost
Higher costs may have implications on funding
strategy. Some additional dedication needs
Higher costs may have implications on funding
strategy. Some additional dedication needs and
potential impacts on development yield on
Vandermost
Highest costs may have significant implications
on funding strategy. Some additional dedication
needs
C. Order of Magnitude Infrastructure Costs
Ideal Condition: lower costs contained to those supported
by development
Lowest cost and no need for CIP, County, or City
funding sources
Approximately double the cost of Scenario 1 and
may need CIP, County, or City funding sources
Higher cost compared to Scenario 1 and may
need CIP, County, or City funding sources
Approaching triple the cost of Scenario 1 and
may need CIP, County, or City funding sources
D. Timing, Phasing, and Project Cost
Ideal Condition: development can be phased to delay
infrastructure costs
Phasing can be structured to delay costs Additional stream crossing may bring forward
costs
Additional stream crossing may bring forward
costs
Two additional stream crossings may bring
forward costs
E. Fire, Life, and Safety
Ideal Condition: meets fire, life, safety with minimal
impact on development yield and response times
Meets fire, life safety needs with some impacts
on development on Vandermost
Meets fire, life safety needs with multiple
accesses and response directions. Higher traffic
volumes may impact emergency response time
Meets fire, life safety needs with some impacts
on development on Vandermost
Meets fire, life safety needs with multiple
accesses and response directions. Higher traffic
volumes may impact emergency response time
A. Equitable Impacts
Ideal Condition: no impacts to vulnerable populations Lowest exposure to emissions, noise, and crash
risk but some impacts from climate resilience
Higher exposure to emission, noise, and crash
risk, impacts to housing affordability and climate
resilience
Higher exposure to emission, noise, and crash
risk, impacts to housing affordability and climate
resilience. Increased connectivity
Highest exposure to emission, noise, and crash
risk and impacts to housing affordability and
climate resilience. Increased connectivity
Legend
Scenario meets the ideal condition
Scenario has a small impact compared to the ideal condition
Scenario has medium impact compared to the ideal condition
Scenario has a significant impact compared to the ideal condition
Scenario has a very significant impact compared to the ideal condition
Scenario is neutral or operates with no change to existing conditions
4.
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
F
e
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
5.
E
q
u
i
t
y