Compliance - Archives and Special Collections Management - Metro Archives and Special Collections Records - Metro Council Committee Meeting Records

Members Present: Rod Park (Chair), Bill Atherton, David Bragdon, Susan McLain and Rod Monroe

1. Consideration of the Minutes of the August 7, 2001, Community Planning Committee Meeting

Mr. Andy Cotugno, Planning Director, distributed the Planning Department Progress Report (dated September 4, 2001, and included as part of this record) and then reviewed the report for the committee, saying he would provide a date on the UGB Capacity Potential item under Periodic Review. He also mentioned that the 2040 Re-engagement process was not addressed in this report. The Goal 5 Significance Criteria and Regional Resource Determination in the report stated there would be a proposed draft in November with proposed approval in December, but he thought it was supposed to be a proposed draft in October with proposed approval in November, and said he would check that.

Responding to a comment on meeting timelines from Councilor McLain, Mr. Cotugno said he felt good about what was being done on a regional basis, but was not so sure on what was being done on a subregional basis. Councilor McLain said that was good, but that she didn’t want to proceed if the state doesn’t answer the questions Metro’s asked. Mr. Cotugno said he didn’t think the state would clarify the subregional issue until Metro suggested something. Councilor McLain said she didn’t want to make a proposal until the state had answered the questions posed by Metro.

Chair Park interjected that staff had met with the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and were preparing a position paper on criteria of how to define subregions; this would be sent to the state prior to starting any subregional work. He said Metro doesn’t want to expend resources until we know what we’re going. Chair Park said Ms. Neill’s work was involved in this, as well, in the Alternatives Analysis, and questions on that will be sent for clarification to DLCD. Councilor McLain said she agreed 100% with Chair Park’s plan and that she felt good about it. She said she doesn’t want to be in the same battle again, but if Metro doesn’t get a response, we not proceed. She wanted to reiterate and make clear that Chair Park had said that even if staff does send work down and questions are asked, that we will not go forward until the answers are given. Chair Park agreed.

Mr. Cotugno said this was an aggressive work plan, and Chair Park said the committee needed to know what the doable items were and where the bottom lines were in case choices needed to be made next year.

In closing on this item, Chair Park asked Mr. Cotugno to submit a revised work plan with the correct and/or missing dates, as mentioned above.

• I-5 Case Study – Ms. Christine Deffebach, Principal Transportation Planner, Corridor Planning Division, Planning Department, summarized the MetroScope Results in Part 1: MetroScope Base Case, and Part 2: MetroScope I-5 Added Capacity Case. A copy of her presentation is included as part of this record. Chair Park informed the committee that he had had the opportunity to sit attend the Expert Review Panel with the Planning staff the previous week and found it very interesting.

• Functional Plan Compliance – Mary Weber, Community Development Division Manager, Planning Department, said that the report being given to the committee was at the request of MPAC, and showed what compliance has been done by the jurisdictions. Ms. Brenda Bernards, Senior Regional Planner of the Community Development Division, spoke to the Status of Compliance with the Functional Plan – August 29, 2001, charts. She pointed out that these charts were updated from the August 22, 2001, charts included in the agenda packet (the change was Gresham’s Water Quality and Flood Management were reversed). A number of jurisdictions have notified Metro staff that they are moving closer to being in compliance, she said, and other jurisdictions have requested extensions. Ms. Weber said she and Mr. Dick Benner, Senior Assistant Council, had discussed time extensions and the exceptions process, and the next step was to ask for instruction from the Council how they want staff to proceed.

Chair Park said he’s asked Mr. Dan Cooper, General Counsel, to issue a memo regarding the Ballot Measure 7 question so that the jurisdictions will continue compliance work. Councilor McLain said she remembered telling staff that no further exceptions/extensions would be heard until the criteria was decided. Mr. Cotugno said that staff had submitted a “next draft” of a proposed exceptions process at the August 7^th committee meeting, and he offered to schedule a review of that for further committee discussion and direction.

4. Resolution No. 01-3099 – For the Purpose of Authorizing the Executive Officer to Amend the Intergovernmental Agreement with Tri-Met for the South Corridor Transportation Alternatives Study.

Richard Brandman, Deputy Planning Director, spoke to the staff report regarding this IGA. He explained that this Agreement is necessary because light rail was added back into the South Corridor Study, because of the required analysis of the Hawthorne Bridge rather than the Carruthers Crossing, and to add a downtown study to analyze the number of trains integrated into the existing infrastructure, if feasible. This resolution authorizes Metro’s portion of the amended Scope of Work.

Regarding p. 2 of Exhibit A to the resolution, Councilor Burkholder said that, if it is true that the maximum train volumes will exceed capacity in the next ten to twenty years, shouldn’t these things be planned for earlier. Mr. Brandman said Table 1 showed what the current projected capacity would be, but it was not using all the elements; this Study was trying to determine what elements could be used to get to that number shown on the table. Whether or not this was the time to be looking toward another corridor, he said, was a policy/fiscal question and should be discussed after this project, but the current project needed to go forward without potentially going back to the voters or incurring the significant cost of a new alignment through the downtown. Presiding Officer Bragdon said he agreed that looking to the long-term was good, and he’d also like to see the elimination of some of the stops as a short-term fix. Mr. Brandman said he would like to have the conversation as well, and would relay the councilors’ interest to Tri-Met.

Councilor McLain distributed a memo relating to some other handouts of work she’s been doing with Mr. Cooper and Mr. Benner (and made a part of this record).

Metro Council Community Planning Committee members present: Rod Park (Chair), Bill Atherton, David Bragdon, Susan McLain and Rod Monroe.

The JPACT members present: Commissioner Charlie Hales, City of Portland; Councilor Brian Newman, City of Milwaukie, representing the Cities of Clackamas County; Commissioner Bill Kennemer, Clackamas County; Kay Van Sickel, Region 1 Manager, Oregon Department of Transportation; Commissioner Craig Pridemore, Clark County; and Commissioner Lonnie Roberts, Multnomah County.

Chair Park reconvened the meeting at 5:05 p.m., then welcomed and introduced the attending JPACT members to the audience.

6. Resolution No. 01-3098 – For the Purpose of Amending the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) to Allocate FY 2004-2005 Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) and Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds

Mr. Cotugno then explained the MTIP process and the recommendations for approval. A revised version of the resolution was distributed as well as the Priorities 2002 MTIP Update Project Summary of TPAC Program Recommendation, both dated September 4, 2001, and both made a part of this record. Mr. Cotugno referred to the Priorities 2002 MTIP timeline of key milestones (Attachment 1 to the staff report of the resolution). He explained that the TPAC Program Recommendation included the overall process, the criteria, the projects recommended for funding, the projects recommended for cutting, and a series of the options considered, as well as the resolution itself. The Project Summary was a supplemental packet giving specifics of the projects. The recommended list, he said, was the result of many meetings and was the final recommendation to be used to narrow it down further to balance to the dollars available. Mr. Cotugno emphasized that this list did not address all the transportation funds available to spend in the metropolitan area, but was for the particular categories that Metro has the discretion to allocate, i.e., strictly a category of funds called Surface Transportation Program that are flexible and are intended for metropolitan areas to spend on multi-modal purposes, as well as what are called CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation Air Quality) funds which can only be spent on projects designed to reduce vehicle emissions and cannot be spent on roadway expansion projects.

Of the approximate $50 million resources to be allocated (at $25 million per year for 2004 and 2005), a little over 50% of the available funds are totally flexible and can be spent on any purpose, and a little under 50% can only be spent on alternative mode purposes.

The recommendation included in the agenda packet was the draft staff recommendation that went to the Transportation Policy Alternatives Committee (TPAC) on August 31, 2001, he said, and which was $1.7 million too high. The packet distributed at this meeting was the TPAC recommendation from their August 31^st meeting, and differed somewhat. Mr. Cotugno then highlighted the overall TPAC recommendation, some of the alternatives that were considered for that recommendation, and some of the conditions associated with some of the projects. The fold-out matrix in the TPAC recommendation was what Mr. Cotugno used for these explanations (Exhibit A to the resolution), pointing out the $38 million of available funds to new projects and the $12 million to the past commitment toward Interstate MAX, and also stating that this matrix showed a balanced program. The options proposed in this matrix to balance the projects to the available funds were included in the staff report. Lastly, Mr. Cotugno called attention to Exhibit B to the resolution that stated certain conditions to the projects.

Councilor Monroe, as chair of JPACT, explained to the audience the political process of determining these lists, saying that this year the Metro Council opted to weigh in early and sent a list of their high priority projects to JPACT. Staff then compiled a recommended “cut” list that was then sent to TPAC, and TPAC then made their recommendation to JPACT. TPAC disagreed with the staff recommendation on one project – the Springwater Trail funding, which TPAC voted 8-to-7 to cut in half, and to fully fund the Nyberg Interchange project. A letter from the full Multnomah County Board of Commissioner was received (and is made a part of this record) stating that they disagreed with the Multnomah County TPAC member’s vote. JPACT will make the decision on September 13^th, and that list is projected to come before the Metro Council September 20^th for their approval or disagreement.

1.	Mayor Gene Grant, City of Happy Valley, 11311 SE Charview Ct., Clackamas, OR 97015, urged rejection of Option 1of the TPAC approved staff report, to replace it with staff recommended Option 3 for reasons stated earlier by Mr. Cotugno. Mayor Grant said he was aware that the Clackamas County representative voted in favor of the TPAC Option 1, and he felt that was a mistake. He said he’s spoken with Commissioner Kennemer and hoped to persuade him to take the same approach as the Multnomah County Commissioners. He said he has confirmed with both Lake Oswego and Milwaukie, as well as Happy Valley, support of full funding of the Springwater project. The project is a vital missing link; he personally uses it and feels it’s an extremely important, high priority project.
2.	Brion Barnett, Engineering Department staff, City of Milwaukie, 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd., Milwaukie, OR 97206. Mr. Barnett said the City of Milwaukie also supports full funding for the Springwater project, that a large portion of this connection to the project lies within Milwaukie’s city limits. He said Milwaukie feels that building in one phase has the potential for a low overall construction cost rather than building it in two phases. Milwaukie also disagrees with Clackamas County’s recommendation to not fund it. Mr. Barnett also thanked TPAC for supporting 100% funding for the Johnson Road project.
3.	Martha Waldemar, Chair, Sunnyside United Neighbors CPO, P.O. Box 306, Clackamas, OR 97015, spoke in support of funding the Sunrise Corridor. Ms. Waldemar gave a brief overview of what the congestion was like with all the trucks serving the metropolitan area.
4.	Barb Stickley, (PAC), 11331 SE Alder St., 97216, asked for the financial support to move forward with the purchase of a one-acre parcel from Tri-Met, the first step for creating an integral part of the vision for Portland’s only regional center. Having a say in what happens at this corner is integral to uphold the integrity of the Opportunity Gateway Concept Plan. This Council’s support was appreciated by the people who live and work in the Gateway area, and the people who travel there.

5.	Arlene Kimura, Opportunity Gateway People’s Advisory Committee, chair of Hazelwood Neighborhood Association, 112 NE 173^rd, Portland, OR 97230, testified in favor of Ms. Stickley’s testimony, adding that the redevelopment of the four corners would also increase the need for parking at the Transit Center and that buying another section of acreage was critical for parking for transit.
6.	Beth Baltz, Transportation Chair of the Opportunity Gateway PAC, c/o Adventist Medical Center, 10000 SE Main St., Suite 201, Portland, OR 97216, spoke to the funding of the design work on NE 102^nd. This street will be the spine of the newest urban renewal area in the city of Portland, she added. Commissioner Charlie Hales asked for clarification that the funding in the TPAC recommended list was sufficient to accomplish what she wanted done in the next phase. Ms. Baltz agreed.
7.	Nancy Kraushaar, staff, City of Oregon City and TPAC member representing the Cities of Clackamas County, P. O. Box 3040, Oregon City, OR 97045 testified for the Oregon City Transportation Advisory Committee and submitted written testimony (included as part of this record) in support of the Molalla Avenue Sidewalk Project and the McLoughlin Boulevard Improvements project.
8.	Commissioner Doug Neeley, City of Oregon City, 712 12^th St., Oregon City, OR 97045, spoke to a project that had been cut, the Washington Street Bike Lane. He said Oregon City has projects that would form links to this that will be coming up next year and they would appreciate this being considered.
9.	Councilor Len Edwards, City of Fairview, 635 Lincoln St. (P. O. Box 213), Fairview, OR 97024, thanked the committee for the $134,000 proposed allocation for the right-of-way on the 223^rd Overcrossing. He said the people of Fairview can’t get to the biggest regional park, Blue Lake, by walking or biking under 223rd because it’s too dangerous, and yet there was a $6,700,000 proposed allocation for Pedestrians and Bike rights-of-way elsewhere.
10.	Victoria Brown, manager of the Tualatin Chamber TMA, P. O. Box 701, Tualatin, OR 97062, asked the committee and JPACT to consider full funding for the regional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program, especially the Regional 2040 Initiatives program. TDM programs provide service against traffic congestion as well as access to jobs, she said.
11.	John Bendit, Upscale Automotive and Tualatin TMA Steering Committee, 19460 SW 89^th Avenue, Tualatin, OR 97062, requested full funding of the TDM programs at last year’s level. He said it’s been proven nationally that TMAs and related programs such as shuttle services need ongoing public funding in addition to private funding. This is a very, very successful program and gets people that last mile to their jobs in the Tualatin area. Without this funding the carpool and shuttle programs will cease to exist.
12.	Jim Duncan, Gateway area resident, 9823 NE Irving St., Portland, OR 97220, testified as a non-business person serving on the Opportunity Gateway People’s Advisory Committee. Mr. Duncan said he supports funding of PTOD1, the Gateway Regional Center TOD project. The flow of traffic there is a major problem for residents, tied up by non-area commuters from the park-and-ride. For this reason, he supports funding of the transportation improvements in this area to proceed sooner than later.

13.	Donald Dauterman, President, Durametal Corp., P. O. Box 606, Tualatin, OR 97062, testified in favor of the Nyberg Interchange project. His company employs 100 people and has 15 tons of material coming in and out of the factory every day. The area has grown, and the truck traffic connecting up with I-5/Nyberg Road has increased tremendously. He encouraged this project being on the top of the list and funding found by whatever means.
14.	Lenny Dee, 2588 NE 31^st, Portland, OR 97212, presented written testimony (included as a part of this record) on behalf of the Coalition for a Livable Future (CLF) made up of over 60 non-profits organizations in the region working for a just and equitable region. He urged allocation of regional transportation funds in a way that was most supportive of the 2040 Vision.
15.	John LeCavalier (no testimony card), Coalition for a Livable Future, Natural Resources Working Group, 1622 SE 55^th, Portland, OR 97215, and a worker at Clackamas Community College, said that as he listened to Commissioner Neeley and Nancy Kraushaar and others from Clackamas County, it struck him how important this regional approach is. Mr. LeCavalier also supported funding for the Springwater Corridor project, one reason being to allow people to “amble.”
16.	Becky Smith, Coalition for a Livable Future, Housing Working Group, 3309 SE 15^th, Portland, OR 97212, and a worker in Hillsboro, said transportation issues are critical to affordable housing, and also supported the criteria established by the Council in January for the perspective of the whole region to make sure at least some of these projects meet the 2040 Plan for the region.
17.	Jacob Brostoff, Transportation Advocate, 1000 Friends of Oregon, 534 SW 3^rd, Suite 300, Portland, OR, said he also represented the Coalition for a Livable Future. Mr. Brostoff spoke briefly to the Coalition’s perspective of the larger picture and why the MTIP projects and the funding structure matter to the Coalition. He also said the Council’s criteria eloquently articulates the Coalition’s vision for the region’s future. He said he did not want to repeat his colleagues’ testimony, but to reiterate it. The mix of projects achieved the right mix of transportation and land use, and CLF was very pleased with that.
18.	John Geffel, Senior Vice President of Marketing and Operations, Timberline Software Corporation, 15195 NW Greenbrier Parkway, Beaverton, OR 97006, submitted written testimony (included as a part of this record) relative to the Westside Transportation Alliance and their mission, formation and funding, and he urged support of the region’s TMAs.
19.	Catherine Ciarlo, Executive Director of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance, 1220 SW Morrison St., Portland, OR 97205, encouraged the Metro Council and JPACT to reinstate full funding for the Springwater Corridor. She also recognized the work Metro staff did in putting together their recommendation that provides transportation options in the metropolitan area. As a member of the Board of Directors of the Oregon Climate Trust, Ms. Ciarlo asked if the committee and JPACT would consider reinstating funding of the Region 2040 Initiatives.
20.	Judy Edwards, Executive Director, Westside Transportation Alliance, 15455 NW Greenbrier Parkway, Suite 210, Beaverton, OR 97006, provided written testimony (included as a part of this record) urging funding support for the TDM program housed at Tri-Met, and full funding at $500,000 each for TMAs and for the Region 2040 Initiatives.

21.	Ross Williams, Citizens for Sensible Transportation, 1220 SW Morrison, Suite 535, Portland, OR 97205, submitted written testimony (included as a part of this record), supporting restoring full funding of the region’s TDM program, funding pedestrian access to transit, supporting the Cornell Road/Cedar Mill Town Center boulevard treatment, and full funding of the Springwater Corridor. Mr. Williams also commented on the Mainline Freeway Projects and suggested another choice between the Nyberg Interchange versus the Springwater Corridor of going back to not funding Mainline Freeway Projects.
22.	Nancy Christie, Department Administrator for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Volunteer Transportation Coordinator, OGI School of Science and Engineering at OHSU (formerly Oregon Graduate Institute), OSU, 20000 NW Walker Rd., Beaverton, OR 97006, spoke in support of the Westside TMA, and the funding options Judy Edwards proposed in her testimony, and told the committee how the TMAs beneficially affect OGI.
23.	Greg McPherson, 7430 SE 27^th Avenue, Portland, OR 97202, spoke in favor of full funding for the Springwater Corridor.
24.	Ted Gilbert, Opportunity Gateway Program Advisory Committee, a property owner and a stakeholder in the four-corners area (NE 99^th and Pacific intersection), which includes the Gateway Transit Center. His company’s vision, along with PacTrust, hopes to create an area called Gateway Station in next five years, which could include as much as 50 acres, and would be a vital, lively, attractive district. Mr. Gilbert thought this was an unparalleled opportunity for this region and a meaningful investment here would allow Tri-Met and PDC to work on one of the key corners of the four corners, and he added that the potential MAX south and north lines would make this the most accessible location in the region.
25.	Steve Gutman, private citizen and commercial lender at ShoreBank Pacific, 1823 SE 33^rd, Portland, OR 97214, said he spoke on behalf of the hundreds of people who sent postcards, e-mails and made phone calls urging the Metro Council to fund completion of the Springwater Trail. This is the only pot of dollars for Springwater, Mr. Gutman said, and he urged full funding. Livability itself is becoming a major regional economic engine. Portland is becoming synonymous with livability and its citizens want their selected representatives to invest their hard earned money to keep it that way.
26.	Dick Jones, 3205 SE Vinyard Rd., Oak Grove, OR, 97267, submitted written testimony (included as a part of this record) supporting MTIP funding for Sunrise Corridor project.
27.	Danielle Cowan, Public Affairs Director, City of Wilsonville, 30000 SW Town Center Loop East, Wilsonville, OR 97070, representing the Wilsonville City Council and Wilsonville Mayor Charlotte Lehan, testified that Wilsonville appreciates the staff and TPAC recommendations to partially fund the Boeckman Road Extension and the SMART park-and-ride facility, and she urged JPACT and the Metro Council to fully fund both of these projects as they are critical to providing an important and necessary link for commuters traveling north and south along I-5 through Wilsonville. Responding to a question from Councilor Newman, Ms. Cowan said that the 50% funding level of either project was unknown to Wilsonville until today and they hadn’t had the opportunity to determine alternative funding. It was possible, she said, that the funding reduction wouldn’t allow them to do anything.

28.	Dick Cooley, Opportunity Gateway PAC Chair, 141 SW Wright Ave., Portland, OR 97201, spoke in support of two major projects in Gateway. The Gateway Regional Center TOD and the NE 102^nd Boulevard Design projects will not happen without the kind of early attention asked for in these two projects, and he urged support for them.
29.	Mark Schoening, City Engineer, City of Lake Oswego, P. O. Box 369, Lake Oswego, OR 97034, said Lake Oswego supports (as JPACT recommended) the planning study of the Willamette Shore Rail/Trail Line, believing even with the reduced funding that the goals of the study can be accomplished. The Boones Ferry Corridor Study, which didn’t make the final cut to the 100% list, is a project that Lake Oswego has fully funded that’s being completed and will be taken to their Planning Commission to amend their Comprehensive Plan and Public Facilities Plan. They’re disappointed that the pre-design money was cut, but have high expectations for next time.
30.	Michael Wolfe, 2387 NW Northrup, #5, Portland, OR 97210, testified for full funding of the original $4 million for the Springwater Trail connection, specifically by answering three potential objections: 1) it’s a more recreation oriented than transportation oriented facility; 2) it’s only a Portland project, and 3) it’s the cost. His perspective was to look at Metro’s bike map . . . the Springwater link would integrate the whole. Doing the easy and cheap will always ensure a piecemeal approach, he said, and urged approval of full funding for the project.
31.	Rose Rummel-Eury, member of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA) and a TAB board member of Lake Oswego, 5010-D Foothills Rd., Lake Oswego, OR 97034, spoke in support of the Willamette Shores Trail Study. Ms. Rummel-Eury said she was also here on behalf of her parents who live in Durham, NC, and who have seen their quality of life go down, while their daughter lives car free and carefree. She said she hopes Metro continues to live by its 2040 Vision. She also spoke to the traffic problem along the highway strip between the Sellwood Bridge and downtown Lake Oswego, and how dangerous it was.
32.	Jerry Foy, 15142 SE Fairoaks Ave., Oak Grove, OR, Vice-chair of the Oak Lodge CPO, a member of Clackamas County’s Concurrency Committee, and a lifelong resident of Clackamas County, thanked the committee and JPACT for funding the engineering studies required for the Sunrise Corridor project. He said this is probably the most important transportation project in Clackamas County and will likely have the biggest impact on the county growth pattern in the next decade. This project is critical to success of commercial and public transportation.
33.	Margaret Pritchard, 2510 SE Concord Rd., Milwaukie, OR 97267 (Oak Grove area), testified as a member of the North Clackamas County Chamber, Land Use/Transportation Committee, that their highest priority was the Sunrise Corridor, with the main interest being livability and job availability in Clackamas County. Portland would no longer be livable if it didn’t have the freight on Sunrise Corridor.
34.	Paul Grosjean, Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association, 15714 SE Henderson Way, Portland, OR 97236, spoke to the SE 162^nd and Foster (SE Foster Rd./Kelly Creek project), which made the cut list. Mr. Grosjean said this was a Portland transportation issue, but also a regional issue, which makes it a Metro issue. It’s an environmental issue regarding the fish habitat, which Metro has pledged to support, and this project would correct a substandard culvert. It’s a safety issue (or a human habitat issue) in that it’s dangerous now and is getting more so, with 16,000 cars using the intersection each day with the one stop sign. None of the transportation master plans for this area include this project, and this is a bad premise. Mr. Grosjean asked the committee and JPACT to please review and fund this project.

35.	Bill DeWitt, 15842 SE Henderson Way, Portland, OR 97236, resident of Hawthorne Ridge, and on the Board of Directors of the Homeowners Association, also spoke to the SE 162^nd and Foster Road intersection, and said he represented the 500+ people who use it daily. Mr. DeWitt then described a typical day at the intersection, explaining how dangerous it is. He said that five years ago the City of Portland asked the citizens to put up their own money (500 people contributed $900,000), saying no more houses could be built until a stoplight was approved. Today, the light is still not there and the City of Portland still has their money. Councilor Monroe added that Mr. DeWitt’s description of the intersection was not an exaggeration, that it was the most dangerous one he’d ever gone through. Commissioner Lonnie Roberts asked Mr. DeWitt if the light at SE 174^th has helped, and Mr. DeWitt said it has, a little. Commissioner Roberts, Mr. DeWitt, Paul Grosjean, Councilor Atherton and Portland Commissioner Charlie Hales had a conversation about the funds the citizens had provided, and how the City of Portland could not come up with matching funds, after many attempts to do so, to put in the stoplight.
36.	Jack Newlevant, 1904 SE Hemlock Ave., Portland, OR 97214, testified as a member of the City of Portland Bicycle Advisory Committee, communicating his support for the Springwater Trail, and added that he’s very enthusiastic about Metro’s acquisition of the property along the river.
37.	Robert Schmidt, 824 SE Lambert St., Portland, OR 97202, Board of Directors of the Sellwood Moreland Improvement League (SMILE), and an ODOT employee, said he is a strong bicycle advocate and supports funding for the Springwater Trail connection, as it is a vital link and it supports the 2040 Plan.
38.	Gary Mengis, 15706 SE Henderson Way, Portland, OR 97236, and president of the Hawthorne Ridge Homeowners Association. Mr. Mengis testified on the SE 162^nd and Foster Road intersection, saying it’s the only viable route to Portland for the area’s 500 homeowners. He said he wants to go on record that he loves bicycles, but this intersection is incredibly dangerous, and the past week there was a fatality accident there.
39.	Robert Porter, 2185 NW 124^th Ave., Portland, OR 97229 (Cedar Mill area of Washington County), a citizen member of Washington County’s Cornell and Barnes Road Project Advisory Committee, voiced his disappointment that the Cornell Road project was dropped from the MTIP Boulevard Projects list. One of the reasons given for withholding the funds on the project, he said, was that the design wasn’t completed. Mr. Porter said it’s difficult to design something when you don’t know how much money will be allocated for the project. He said he hopes there’s some awareness of how important it is for the Cedar Mill Town Center to be developed, and hopes for future funding set-asides for it. Presiding Officer Bragdon told Mr. Porter that this project has been discussed, and to not give up hope, that Metro wants to encourage the design of this to continue. When Washington County brought it forward, Presiding Officer Bragdon said, it wasn’t working the way even the neighborhood wanted it, so he encouraged Mr. Porter to continue working on it. Chair Park added that he agreed with the Presiding Officer.

40.	Patti McCoy, P. O. Box 55651, Portland, OR 97238, of the Columbia Corridor Association (CCA), spoke to the N. Lombard Overcrossing project, and the Gresham/Multnomah County ITS Phase 3 project, saying she fully concurred with JPACT and strongly supported these. The Columbia/Killingsworth project continues to be an extremely high priority for the Columbia Corridor Association. The region needs to look at other funding mechanisms, she added, saying that strategic investments in the transportation infrastructure are critical to maintaining the economic engine of the region. Absent the funding for the Columbia/Killingsworth east end connector project, CCA anticipates support through the 2001 Transportation Investment Act.
41.	Fred Nussbaum, 6510 SW Barnes Rd., Portland, OR 97225, spoke representing the Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates (AORTA), Portland Chapter, and as a 42-year resident, and said he opposes any capacity increases like the Sunrise Corridor, the Nyberg Bridge crossing, or Hwy. 26 widening, whether for construction or preliminary engineering. More effort needs to be put into alternatives. More freight can be put into railroads; everyone and every jurisdiction can do something to change this. Mr. Nussbaum also spoke in support of commuter rail and funding the Springwater Trail project, and said he particularly supported Tri-Met receiving full MTIP funding for capital projects, but not for operations.
42.	Phil Goff, 1955 NW Hoyt St., #24, Portland, OR 97209, spoke representing the Portland Bicycle Advisory Committee who concurred with the recommendations to fund the Springwater Trail and Morrison Bridge projects, which has been the highest priority for their committee. In principal, he said, all non-freeway bridges in Portland need to be available for all modes of transportation. When barriers like the Willamette River are overcome, bike use explodes.
43.	Mark Norberg, 4845 SW 195^th Ct., Aloha, OR 97007, appeared as a member of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA), Washington County chapter. Mr. Norberg said that since the City of Portland is the most bike friendly city in the United States, he’d like to see that friendliness extended to the rest of the metropolitan area. Mr. Norberg said he was very much in favor of bicycle projects and other projects that support alternative transportation, especially the Fanno Creek Trail and the Springwater Connection Trail. He said it just makes sense to fund alternative forms of transportation as bicycling is a valid form of transportation, it doesn’t take up as much room as cars, and it doesn’t use nor burn fossil fuels. He urged the committee and JPACT to use any remaining funds for transportation alternatives.
44.	Ed Jahn, 14109 SE Fairoaks Ave., Milwaukie, OR 97267, and a television producer for Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB), supported the South Corridor DEIS and the Willamette Shoreline Rail and Trail. Mr. Jahn said he was a regular bike commuter, but holds onto his car because bike options are limited. He said he would support any proposal that brings mass transit, etc., to Milwaukie, and if rapid transit went from Milwaukie to Lake Oswego, where he worked, he’d give away his car.
45.	Mike McKillip, City of Tualatin, 18880 SW Martinazzi Ave., Tualatin, OR 97062, spoke on behalf of the City of Tualatin to fully support the staff recommendation to fully fund the I-5/Nyberg Interchange project. This project will help that area to continue growing. Forty-six percent of the respondents to a recent survey said the traffic congestion on the Tualatin/Sherwood Road was their number one concern in the city, and the next highest ranked issue was only 15 or 16 percent. Tualatin citizens think their city’s done a lot in the last 20 years toward being a 2040-type development with a fairly equal balance of housing/jobs, redeveloped jobs, greenway corridor setbacks, etc. This project would serve traffic coming into and going out of their area. For these reasons, in addition to all the other comments they’ve made in the past, Tualatin supports full funding of the I-5/Nyberg Interchange project.

46.

John Fahsbender, 4136 NE 31^st Ave., Portland, OR 97211, spoke as a member of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance and said he supported full funding of the Springwater Trail and the Morrison Bridge projects, and urged the committee and JPACT to continue to fund transportation alternatives.

47.

Commissioner Lonnie Roberts, Multnomah County Board of Commissioner, 601 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland, OR 97214, spoke to the Board of Commissioner’s letter to the Community Planning Committee, faxed just prior to the beginning of the meeting (and made a part of this record). The letter stated Multnomah County’s support for full funding of the Springwater Trail project, the Morrison Bridge Bike/Pedestrian Facility and the 223^rd Ave. Railroad Overcrossing Right-of-Way.

48.

Commissioner Craig Pridemore, Clark County Board of Commissioners, P. O. Box 5000, Vancouver, WA 98666-5000, said he appreciated this joint public hearing and the opportunity to hear public comment from this side of the river, particularly when so much of the testimony was positive and affirmative.

Chair Park thanked everyone who testified and participated, and reminded them that JPACT would be meeting the following Thursday, September 13, for next step in the MTIP process, and then final action by the Metro Council tentatively scheduled for September 20, 2001.

There being no further business for the committee, Chair Park adjourned the meeting at 8:47 p.m.

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 (continued)

50 cards were submitted requesting testimony on the MTIP (Resolution No. 01-3098). One card was a duplicate, and two had to leave the meeting before they could give their testimony (below).

REFERENCE/ ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION	DOCUMENT DATE	DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION	DOCUMENT NO.
Agenda Item 7.	Sept. 4, 2001	Planning Department Progress Report, re the Westside Transportation Alliance and their mission, formation and funding.	090401cp-01
Agenda Item 3.	Sept. 4, 2001	MetroScope Results (copy of presentation)	090401cp-02
	Aug. 29, 2001	Status of Compliance with the Functional Plan	090401cp-03
	Sept. 4, 2001	Memo from Councilor McLain to Community Planning Committee re Amendments to the Urban Growth Boundary	090401cp-04

REFERENCE/ ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION	DOCUMENT DATE	DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION	DOCUMENT NO.
Agenda Item 3.	Sept. 4, 2001	Proposed Regional Framework Plan and Code amendments (redline version), distributed with Councilor McLain’s memo, Proposed Amendments to the Regional Framework Plan and the Code on “Locational Adjustments” and “Major Amendments,” by Richard Benner, Office of General Counsel	090401cp-05
	Sept. 4, 2001	Proposed Regional Framework Plan and Code amendments (clean text version), distributed with Councilor McLain’s memo, Major Amendments/Locational Adjustments – Clean Text	090401cp-06
Agenda Item 6.	Sept. 4, 2001	TPAC Program Recommendation (revised Resolution No. 01-3098	090401cp-07
	Sept. 4, 2001	Priorities 2002 MTIP Update Project Summary of TPAC Program Recommendation	090401cp-08
	Sept. 4, 2001	Letter to Metro Council and Community Planning Committee from Oregon City Transportation Advisory Committee, Ginger Taylor and Melanie Paulo, Co-Chairs	090401cp-09
	Sept. 4, 2001	Testimony by Lenny Dee on behalf of the Coalition for a Livable Future, Transportation Reform Working Group	090401cp-10
	Sept. 4, 2001	Testimony Transcript from John Geffel, Sr. VP Marketing & Operations, re the Westside Transportation Alliance and their mission, formation and funding.	090401cp-11
	Sept. 4, 2001	Westside Transportation Alliance, Metro Public hearing on MTIP, submitted by Judy Edwards, Executive Director	090401cp-12
	Sept. 4, 2001	Ross Williams, Citizens for Sensible Transportation, Testimony to Joint Metro Community Planning Committee/JPACT Public Hearing	090401cp-13