MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

Tuesday, March 3, 1998

Metro Council Chamber

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

Members Absent:  Jon Kvistad

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

1.  INTRODUCTIONS

None.

2.  CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998

3.  UPDATE ON SOUTH/NORTH LIGHT RAIL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)

Richard Brandman, Principal Program Director, Metro Transportation Department, gave a briefing on the major findings of the South/North Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). He said finishing the DEIS represents a major milestone in the development of this project. He called the committee’s attention to a summary called “Benefits of the South/North Light Rail Project,” contained in the agenda packet as part of the meeting record. This summary presents key points in the DEIS. The DEIS itself makes no recommendations on alignments or length options; rather, it presents information on the trade-offs inherent in each choice. Mr. Brandman presented some of the key the findings, highlighting particular benefits of building the light rail along the proposed corridor as compared with adding more buses to the same corridor.

Councilor McLain asked if the DEIS provides an estimate of the number of buses that would need to be added. Mr. Brandman said yes. He said the light rail would provide more transit trips per day while reducing the number of buses that must enter the downtown Portland transit mall. It would also significantly reduce the number of parking spaces needed in the downtown area.

Mr. Brandman gave a slide presentation that illustrated what the light rail project would aim to accomplish. Print-outs of the slides are attached to the meeting record. To the slides on ridership, he added that a major benefit of the light rail would be that it could accommodate double the ridership by simply adding another train. To accommodate the same increase by automobile would require a new highway. The estimates of travel-time savings are based on federal figures of about $10/hour. On traffic relief, he commented that no single project will get rid of traffic congestion, but this one can help.

Michael Morrissey, Council Analyst, asked if the calculations on ridership included transit riders who would not otherwise have made the trip at all. Mr. Brandman said no, because the federal government prescribes that all the calculations have the same base. Mr. Brandman said that new riders will, in fact, happen; however, the model does not include induced travel.

Mr. Brandman commented that travel times for automobiles will also be reduced as a result of traffic congestion relief. Councilor McLain said that must be made clear to the voting public. But the public should also know the other side of that coin: if the light rail is not built, not only will travel times not be reduced--they will increase as the population increases.

Mr. Brandman said that the slide on developable land begins to address 2040 issues. One of the questions frequently asked is whether Metro or local jurisdictions will require upzoning around every station. The answer is that every station will be considered separately. Although Metro has density goals and targets, these are not requirements; local jurisdictions will have the final say over the character of each station area.

Councilor McLain noted the station area planning that has been going on for the past two years in Hillsboro. She said Hillsboro has recently been considering revisions that might need to be made to fit with Title 3 if it is adopted. She asked whether the potential implications of Title 3 had been taken into consideration in doing this DEIS.

Leon Skiles, Manager, High-Capacity Transit Planning, Metro Transportation Department, said that the expert review panel recommended that the DEIS reflect all environmental perspectives, from federal to state to regional to local. The DEIS was consistent with the requirements of Title 3 and the model ordinance as they stood last fall, when the DEIS was being prepared. The department anticipates making refinements as Title 3 is revised.

Councilor McLain asked if the DEIS has an index to direct her to the part that addresses Metro 2040 goals. Mr. Brandman said the document, though large, is general. The index would indicate where to find a general discussion, and that the text would refer to an appendix for details. Mr. Brandman added that the document was designed and formatted to respond to federal requirements for an EIS and might not address in detail on all the issues brought up by Councilor McLain.

Mr. Brandman continued with the slide show. On a slide showing the reduction in demand for parking spaces downtown under various scenarios, he noted that demand will be significantly reduced. Commenting on a slide of cost comparisons with 1994 dollars, he said that in future presentations only future year dollars would be displayed, to avoid confusion. He also noted that the reason the costs are shown as a range is because some specifics, such as the type of river crossing, have not yet been decided.

Finally, Mr. Brandman introduced two points that have not yet been made into slides: 1) The light rail can go a long way toward avoiding the need to build new highway capacity. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) estimated the cost to build a highway to carry 3,000 more people per hour from Clackamas to downtown Portland at $3 billion. Light rail along that same route would cost $1 billion and carry 6,000 people per hour. 2) The light rail presents the opportunity to develop lands adjacent to or near stations. There are currently about 430 acres of developable land out there. Not only is this land available, but the development community has responded. On the east side, more than $1.3 billion in new development has sprung up along the MAX line. Development along the west side MAX line will easily exceed that. More than $300 million has occurred to date, even before the has opened. A $2 billion Intel plant will soon be added near the alignment. The more this kind of development happens inside the station area, the less pressure there will be to expand the Urban Growth Boundary.

In addition to the benefits from development, the light rail will create new jobs--15,000 new jobs will be created just for construction, and several thousand permanent jobs will be created to operate the system.

In closing his presentation, Mr. Brandman distributed a draft schedule for the adoption process, which will be discussed by the South/North Steering Committee on March 5. (The draft schedule is attached to the meeting record.) He noted that the process includes an unprecedented level of public involvement. He called the committee’s attention to key dates on the proposed schedule. One is at the end of May when the Project Management Group (PMG) will make its recommendation. After that, the Citizen’s Advisory Committee will make a recommendation, and at the beginning of June the Steering Committee will make a recommendation. Public hearings will take place throughout this period, at which point a recommendation will be released to the jurisdictions asking city officials to make further recommendations on behalf of their jurisdictions. JPACT will consider this on July 9, the Transportation Committee on July 21, and the Metro Council on July 30.

The issue will come before the Transportation Planning Committee on numerous occasions not shown on the schedule; the schedule shows only key adoption dates. By or on July 30, the length option and alignment will be chosen. That will pave the way to complete the federal process, which includes approval and publication of the final EIS and issuance of a “Record of Decision.” If all goes well, Tri-Met could begin construction in the summer of 1999.

Councilor McLain expressed concern over what she perceived as a hole in the proposed schedule under the area labeled “Jurisdiction/Agency Recommendations.” She thought the Metro Council ought to be listed there as an entity providing recommendations, along with Portland. It should not be shown just giving approval. She said she does not want the public to perceive the Council as being merely a rubber stamp, present only after the plans have been made. She was concerned that the public would not understand the Council’s role by looking at the schedule as shown.

Mr. Cotugno said the Transportation Planning Committee would have numerous opportunities to make recommendations, but all those opportunities were not shown on this schematic. The schematic shows only key decision points. He said all the decision-making process after the Steering Committee on June 4 would be approval steps. He said the interaction to which Councilor McLain referred needs to happen, but it needs to happen before that date. He said the interaction to which she refers is indicated in the schedule under the heading “Jurisdictional Briefings.” He said the Metro Transportation Planning Committee could be named there.

Councilor McLain maintained that Metro should be listed with the jurisdictions. She said she felt the sheet incorrectly portrayed the way this very important decision would be made.

Chair Washington suggested discussion of this topic be suspended for now and taken up in a follow-up meeting outside of the Transportation Planning Committee meeting. He asked that Councilor McLain meet with him, Mr. Brandman, and Mr. Cotugno the next day, on March 4.

Mr. Brandman introduced Gina Whitehill-Baziuk, to summarize the public outreach efforts that have been done to date and those that are planned. Ms. Whitehill-Baziuk distributed a packet containing copies of notices published in various newspapers to date and copies of information mailed to the public. (This packet is attached to the meeting record.) She briefly recounted in which publications the various pieces had or will appear. In addition, she said one-on-one briefings have been scheduled with the Scanner, the Clackamas Review, and The Oregonian. In addition to the information in the packet, Metro also has a series of ads in Our Town, the Willamette Week, and The Oregonian, promoting a downtown open house scheduled for March 16 at noon. Another series of ads will go out for the public hearings scheduled to be held on April 8 and 13. Further, Metro’s Web page has current information. New messages have also been put on the Metro Hot Line and The Oregonian’s “Inside Line.” In addition, she said that as soon as a briefing book has been completed, Tech Facts will be printed and made available.

Chair Washington asked if the department’s outreach has been coordinated with the Council’s outreach. Ms. Whitehill-Baziuk said coordination has been good. She said she sits with Beth Anne Steele, the Council’s Outreach Coordinator, on an interdepartmental communications group. Also, Ms. Steele worked with John Donovan from Growth Management and with staff from Transportation to put together a slide show about Metro.

Chair Washington said that from this point forward, any conversations with any newspaper should include him and/or Councilor McLain and/or Councilor Kvistad. He said it is crucial to include representatives from the elected part of Metro in these conversations. He said if transportation issues are to have Council support, the Council must be part of the entire process.

Councilor McLain said she reads everything that relates to South/North because it is an important issue and she takes it seriously. She said to gain public support, she needs to be able to present the issue to the public. To do that, she as a policy-maker needs to be included along with staff, to present the policy side of the issue. This is important not only so the public can understand the issue from the policy perspective, but also to gain and keep the support of the policy-makers. She complimented the Transportation Staff on the fine job it normally does. She requested that staff keep her informed ahead of time of dates when public hearings and presentations are to be held.

Chair Washington reiterated the need to set aside time on Wednesday, March 4, to meet with Councilor McLain and Mr. Cotugno to talk about ways to ensure Council participation. He reiterated the need to keep Council support through the process and the need to keep all parties informed.

Mr. Brandman said he agreed with what has been said. He said that input from the Council is built into the process, even that apparently has not been made clear. He said he will make it clear.

Councilor McLain added that the Council is not unified in its view of the South/North project, and uniform support cannot be assumed. She said she and Chair Washington are among the most supportive, but gaining full support from the rest of the Councilors requires work.

Mr. Brandman closed by recognizing the efforts of the staff in putting together the DEIS. He commended Mr. Skiles, who provided leadership in getting the document together. He said the staff worked days, nights, and weekends to get the document finished and published.

Chair Washington suggested setting up a work session with the Council on the South/North project so questions can be addressed well in advance of having to make decisions on the project.

Aleta Woodruff, Metro Committee for Citizen Involvement (MCCI), requested that the slide presentation Mr. Brandman just showed be shown to the members of MCCI.

4.  REVIEW OF AGENDA FOR THE MARCH 12, 1998, JOINT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION (JPACT) MEETING

Andrew Cotugno, Director, Metro Transportation Department, distributed the agenda for the next JPACT meeting, scheduled for Thursday, March 12, 1998. (The agenda is attached to the meeting record.) He called attention to item #2 on the agenda, the Unified Work Program, which must be adopted at JPACT before the budget is adopted. The reason for the rush is that it must be adopted in time to be considered for federal grant money that is dispensed beginning July 1. He said early approval is crucial this year, because under the temporary extension Congress adopted last fall, all of the ISTEA funds stop May 1. Metro has requested the federal authorities accelerate their decision process, moving up what they would ordinarily do in June to April, to be able to make a decision before May 1. If they wait until after May 1, they will not be allowed to act unless Congress changes the temporary deadline. If changes need to be made to the budget later as a result of adopting this early, that can be done.

Mr. Cotugno said the budget for the Unified Work Program is one of the items that has not yet been seen. He said it will be presented at the Budget Committee meeting tomorrow. He reminded the committee that it is typical for the timing for this consideration to be out of sync.

On other JPACT agenda items, Mr. Cotugno said Clackamas County had requested an opportunity to present its Clackamas Regional Center plan to JPACT. Staff had hoped to combine this with the Oregon City Regional Center plan. He said the Transportation Planning Advisory Committee (TPAC) had heard Oregon City’s plan about two months ago, and Clackamas Town Center’s plan this month. The Clackamas Town Center plan, however, had gone back to the drawing board, but the Clackamas Regional Center plan, although still in progress, is nearing completion. Clackamas County would like to be able to present the plan to get feedback before completing it.

Mr. Cotugno said a recommendation to JPACT will be forthcoming on how to handle affordable housing. TPAC discussed it at their last meeting. The recommendation has three major points: 1) Transportation-related projects can encourage affordable housing by directly benefiting access to those projects or by including some infrastructure obligation with that project. That was done, for example, in the Belmont Dairy project. A point system to encourage projects like this should be devised and incorporated into the 2040 point system used to score funding allocation. Specifics, such as the exact number of points to be awarded for what elements, have yet to be decided. 2) Other transportation actions have an indirect effect on affordable housing. For example, many transportation policies benefit low-income people and people with housing access problems. Some policies provide cheaper ways to access transit; others call for building housing and jobs closer together, thereby reducing transportation costs and freeing up income that can be then applied to housing costs. These are fundamental to the policy, although they are too vague to be amenable to a point system. 3) A reward system should be used rather than a punitive approach. For example, rather than disqualifying a project because it does not have an affordable housing component, those that do should be rewarded.

Finally, Tri-Met is updating its strategic plan, which is oriented toward implementing the transit aspects of the 2040 plan. Tri-Met is seeking the endorsement of JPACT for its strategic plan.

5.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

None.

There being no further business before the Committee, Chair Washington adjourned the meeting at 4:45 PM.

Prepared by,

Pat Emmerson

Council Assistant

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF MARCH 3, 1998

The following have been included as part of the official public record.