MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING

Tuesday, February 3, 1998

Metro Council Chamber

Members Present:  Ed Washington (Chair), Susan McLain (Vice Chair), Jon Kvistad

Members Absent:  None.

Chair Washington called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM.

1.  INTRODUCTIONS

None.

2.  CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 20, 1998

3.  RESOLUTION No. 98-2601, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FILLING A VACANCY ON THE TRAFFIC RELIEF OPTIONS TASK FORCE

Andrew Cotugno, Director, Metro Transportation Department, explained that Bob Scanlon resigned from the task force because of time constraints connected with his job. However, Mr. Scanlon has said he would like to remain connected with the project. Mr. Scanlon recommended that Albert R. Bullier, Jr., Senior Vice President of Colliers International, replace him. Mr. Bullier is a long-time Portland resident, and he is in Real Estate and Finance, the category that Mr. Scanlon leaves vacant.

Councilor McLain will carry the motion to full Council.

Councilor McLain asked how long the task force will be operating. Mr. Cotugno said until the end of the current calendar year. Councilor McLain asked how many current members are original members of the task force. Mr. Cotugno referred the Councilor to Exhibit B of the Resolution (included in the agenda packet of the meeting record), which lists the members. All those listed except Betty Atteberry are original members.

4.  STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (STIP) PRESENTATION

Mr. Cotugno explained that the purpose of presenting this information is to ensure the Committee is kept informed so it can act quickly when resolutions related to the STIP begin to appear. He provided an overview of the STIP process, which includes selecting projects for funding. He explained the current selection process and the current criteria. He then explained potential modifications to those criteria and the effects on future funding decisions.

Mr. Cotugno called attention to the timeline for the STIP process (titled “2002-2003 MTIP/STIP” and included as part of the meeting record). He explained that in the recent past, Metro has combined the Metro TIP process with the STIP process in order to coordinate the allocation of funds controlled by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and those controlled by Metro. Metro controls regional State Transportation Plan (STP) funds, Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, and Transportation Enhancement funds. The State controls National Highways System funds and Regional STP funds. Generally, Metro’s money can be spent on any transportation projects other than the State’s highway system. This provides for considerable flexibility.

The STIP process takes up to a year and a half to complete, and Metro will not know how much money it will have until the process is complete. When the amount of money is known, then Metro will apply a set of predetermined criteria to rank the potential projects for funding. The criteria will need to be selected before public notices are released in May. This will require input from the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) as well as input from ODOT--most particularly from ODOT, because ideally ODOT would use the same criteria. Even if the criteria are not the same, Metro’s would need ODOT’s approval.

Mr. Cotugno said the current criteria (included in the meeting record) apply to particular categories of projects. For example, bike projects have bike criteria and road projects have road ones, although some criteria are shared by all categories. Each project can be assigned up to 100 points, but generally projects of one type do not have to compete with those of another. Mr. Cotugno said no criteria guide how many of each category will be funded; that is a judgment call. The intent is to fund the best projects in each category and to balance funding allocations geographically and by mode choice.

Councilor Kvistad asked if the selection process allows the flexibility to fund projects that do not rank at the top but have other qualities that give them merit. Mr. Cotugno said yes; that falls under what is called “administrative criteria.” When a funding decision is made based on administrative criteria, the criteria are explained so the public understands the reasoning.

Mr. Cotugno referred the committee to the 2040 criteria (summarized in attachments to the meeting record). He said the criteria have evolved over time and are still evolving. New criteria are added as needed to keep the list relevant. This would be one place to add criteria, for example, that encourage affordable housing.

Mr. Cotugno said JPACT will be considering specific ways to update all the criteria. He said he will be recommending discussions on five issues: 1) affordable housing, 2) bike to school program, 3) non-SOV mode share, 4) boulevard design, and 5) freight. Discussions would include whether criteria should be developed to address these issues, how, in what categories, and given what weight.

Councilor McLain suggested giving more weight to criteria that promote 2040 goals. Mr. Cotugno said this could be done in many ways, not just directly in that category. For example, most if not all non-SOV mode program might be considered to promote 2040 goals.

Mr. Cotugno called the Committee’s attention to a summary of all past allocations from the Metro side of the program. He said both road-building interests and non-road interests have accused Metro of skewing allocations away from them. He said by his providing objective information, people could draw their own conclusions. He noted that all the road projects include some non-road component that supports 2040 goals.

Mr. Cotugno said it is still very early in the process, so the committee could expect to hear from him several more times.

5.  INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT (ISTEA) PRIORITIES FOR 1998-1999

Mr. Cotugno said that the ISTEA position paper for this year was not available when the agenda packet was assembled, so the packet includes last year’s. Last year’s is very similar to this year’s. This year’s is now available. He distributed a staff report about it to the Committee (included in the meeting record).

Mr. Cotugno said it was in some ways disappointing that no transportation policy was adopted by Congress last year, in that all transportation programs nearly came to a halt. Congress chose to do a six-month extension at that time, to keep the pressure on themselves to adopt something. He said Congress would not meet that deadline, either, so the threat of lapse will be there again, and all transportation spending could stop if Congress does not act by May. The good news is that rather than having the issue one of making cutbacks, the issue will be how and in what ways to expand funding. He said the deficit has been shrinking, allowing more money to be made available for transportation.

Mr. Cotugno highlighted issues being debated. On page 3 of Exhibit B of the staff report on ISTEA, there is a discussion of whether the Federal Transit program should establish a minimum allocation that would be given to each state for transit. He said this is not good for large undertakings such as light rail, which have uneven demands from year to year. In general, this idea would not benefit Oregon. Unlike highway programs, transit is much more concentrated in certain states and is not uniform, so a minimum allocation approach works against high-transit states like Oregon.

On page 4 of Exhibit B is a discussion the New Start program. There is debate about what the New Start program would look like. One version of a House Bill would restructure the New Start program. In the past, funds have been earmarked at the beginning of a project for that entire project. The new structure would emphasize the merits of the project when the project is ready to begin. The new structure would work well for Metro, in that Metro has a good reputation with the Federal Transportation Administration for finishing quality projects.

On page 8 is a discussion of an area into which Oregon is expanding, and that is to form partnerships with California and Washington to improve the I-5 corridor. Metro’s part has been to work with Washington DOT and Clark County. This would provide resources to do that. This might also set the stage for having a priority funding commitment to execute some of the ideas that arise out of those working relationships.

Number 20 on page 9 includes a discussion of Senator Wyden’s Senate Bill to fund land-use related actions that benefit transportation. To Metro this currently means funding for Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs), but other possibilities might include access management, green corridors, and interchange management.

Mr. Cotugno pointed out that starting on page 10 are all the project priorities Metro has adopted. He called attention to four regional projects that all the jurisdictions in the region agreed were top priorities, along with 10 local priorities on the bottom of pages 12 and 13.

Mr. Cotugno said that the lobbying for transportation funding occurs in February, March, and April, during which time officials are in Washington D.C. to attend a number of professional conferences. This presents an opportunity to form a united front on behalf of projects important to this region. Thus, the timing for passing this ISTEA resolution is important. The resolution will go to JPACT on Thursday, February 4, come before the Transportation Planning Committee on February 17, and before the Council on February 19.

Councilor McLain asked about item number 5, dealing with transit buses. She said she would like to see buses higher on the list. Mr. Cotugno explained that the reason it is written as a statewide request rather than a Tri-Met request is because Tri-Met already has two giant requests in the hopper. It would be unrealistic to think a third would be funded, whereas the state could conceivably receive the funding.

Chair Washington asked about the dates for the March lobbying effort. Mr. Cotugno said most certainly March 10 and 11 and probably March 12, also.

6.  OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION’S (ODOT) HIGHWAY PLAN

Mr. Cotugno said Metro has been working with ODOT for the past year to update its highway plan. (Full copies of the draft plan can be obtained from Metro’s Transportation Department.) He said ODOT has gone a long way toward incorporating Metro’s interests. (Examples of this can be found in a letter to ODOT from JPACT dated February 12, 1998, a copy of which is attached to the meeting record.).

Updates on Miscellaneous Transportation Efforts

Mr. Cotugno highlighted other miscellaneous business not related to the ODOT Highway Plan. He said a number of different transportation efforts are underway. Among those efforts are several projects involved with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update. The Citizen’s Advisory Committee kit will be taken to JPACT next week. Mr. Cotugno said he would be sharing with JPACT the process his staff is currently involved in to put together the project aspects of the RTP. Up to now the focus has been on policy guidance. Now the focus will shift to actual projects. The department plans to develop a draft of a proposed transportation system that meets all the standards that have been set. It will also develop a draft of a “strategic” system, which will include items that have the highest priority, with each item associated with the money needed to implement it. The intent is to be able to define what is most important and why, rather than simply present a long wish list. The drafts will be reviewed once, changes made, and a second version produced. The aim is to have the second version put into resolution form and presented to the Council in July. The procedure will be similar to that used in considering 2040.

Councilor McLain said that the Growth Management Committee has been discussing Urban Reserve productivity. She said that as the Transportation Department develops infrastructure costs, it needs to be certain its work is in concert with Growth Management’s work. In her view, transportation and land use issues must be integrated. Mr. Cotugno said he had talked with Mark Turpel from Growth Management, who is working on the Urban Reserve Productivity Study. He said the RTP uses 2020 projection figures, which should cover all of the plans for Tier One and half of those for Tier Two. The intention is to use the information in the RTP to meet the transportation infrastructure planning needs for those Urban Reserve areas. Planning for beyond 2020 will require updated growth figures.

Council McLain asked if the Growth Management Department and the Transportation Department could develop a joint presentation for the Council and relevant committees. Councilor Kvistad said Council would gladly set aside time for such a presentation.

Chair Washington suggested that he meet with Lisa Naito, Chair of the Council’s Growth Management Committee, Councilor McLain, Mr. Turpel, representatives from the Legal Department, and Mr. Cotugno on Monday at 2 PM.

Mr. Cotugno said the southwest river-crossing study is also underway. The results of that study should be ready by April.

The Traffic-Relief Options study is also underway, but it was temporarily stalled while improvements were being made to the model, to include road-pricing. Results of that study should be available in May. The Traffic Relief Options Task Force has, however, expressed concern that none of the eight options approved by the Council represent an opportunity to complete a good pilot project quickly. Current projects are either large and require considerable up-front work, which would push the project 10 years out, or they take a lane away from an existing roadway, which is politically impractical. Neither makes a good pilot project. The Task Force has asked that the staff revisit the options to try to find some that can be done more quickly.

In further updates, Mr. Cotugno said the South/North Environmental Impact Statement was sent to the Federal Transportation Administration last Friday. The release date to the Federal Register is expected to be February 21. A 60-day public comment period will follow, after which the alignment options will be finalized.

Regarding the TOD program, the environmental assessment required before a site can be considered has been done. The public comment period for a project of this size is four weeks. That is now underway. A public hearing on the environmental assessment in front of a hearings officer is scheduled for February 19. Assuming all goes well, Federal approval should come the first part of March.

Chair Washington thanked Mr. Cotugno for all the updates. He said his hope is that by having frequent updates, Council will be well prepared when it comes time to act.

Councilor McLain expressed her appreciation for the informational update. She reiterated her concern that transportation decisions not run counter to land use decisions, and she restated her belief that the two should be complementary. She said the productivity of the urban reserves will depend on having a complementary transportation/land-use system.

Mr. Cotugno said he felt confident that that will happen, especially in planning for the next 20 years. He said the transportation system will be planned to promote land-use goals. His concern lies in the future, beyond 2020. To plan for that far ahead, staff must have population and employment projections. Those are necessarily quite speculative at this time.

Chair Washington closed the discussion by saying in his experience Mr. Cotugno’s almost automatically makes transportation decisions with land-use goals in mind. He has every confidence that practice will continue.

7.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

None.

There being no further business before the Committee, Chair Washington adjourned the meeting at 4:30 PM.

Prepared by,

Pat Emmerson

Council Assistant