MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING

Thursday, January 17, 2002

Council Annex

Members Present:  Rex Burkholder (Chair), Bill Atherton (Vice Chair), Rod Monroe

Members Absent:  None.

Chair Burkholder called the meeting to order at 10:02 a.m.

3.  Consideration of the Minutes of the December 4, 2001, Community Planning Committee Meeting.

2.  Committee Organization/Structure. In reviewing the committee organization and structure, Chair Burkholder said the committee was scheduled to meet on the first and third Thursday of each month at 10 a.m. His hope was to hold the first meeting of each month in the Council Annex in order to have a work session in an informal setting, and also to review agenda items and materials that may be upcoming to JPACT regarding policy. (He cautioned the committee to speak clearly when meeting in the Annex since the sound recording system was not as sophisticated as that in the chamber.) The second meeting of the month, in the council chamber, would be for formal action on legislation and/or taking public testimony.

Chair Burkholder said that he and Councilor Rod Park, Chair of the Community Planning Committee, agreed that from time to time there would be issues of transportation and land use that would overlap – issues such as MetroScope, the impact of the I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership, and the MTIP refinement process. At those times, since all the councilors would be present, joint meetings of the two committees would be appropriate.

Chair Burkholder then asked for comments and suggestions from the committee. Councilor Monroe said interaction between this committee and JPACT was critical, and in previous years issues were heard here prior to going to JPACT, and then they would come back to this committee after approval by JPACT, and then on to the full council. He thought the Thursday morning meeting schedule would accommodate that well, i.e., reviewing an item that would go before JPACT the following week, and then taking committee action on it the third week (the week after JPACT). If there’s a time constraint, Councilor Monroe added, it could feasibly go before the full Council that same afternoon. He said he had lobbied for the restoration of the Transportation Committee, that this system works better with it being separate from Community Planning. Mr. Michael Morrissey, staff analyst, said the next JPACT meeting was scheduled for February 14^th, and the next Transportation Committee was schedule for February 7^th.

Chair Burkholder said he’d also like to see was this committee utilizing the brainpower of JPACT on a number of policy issues. This committee would provide guidance, as in the MPAC process, he suggested

Councilor Monroe reminded the committee that the federal transportation priorities paper would be upcoming soon, including the annual regional delegation traveling to Washington, D.C., in late February/early March. This was always carefully orchestrated, he said, in order to present a unified front to Washington. When he met with Mr. Wally Hsueh, legislative assistant to Senator Gordon Smith, Councilor Monroe said he asked Mr. Hsueh if he thought these trips were worthwhile, and Mr. Hsueh replied that they were because they showed the entire region’s concurrence on their request for funds. He suggested this committee might want to spend some time on this project at their February meetings.

Beyond that, Councilor Monroe added, was the MTIP process.

3.  Committee Draft Work Plan. Chair Burkholder said Councilor Monroe’s suggestion segued the discussion into the draft work program (a draft of which was distributed and is made a part of this record). This being the first iteration, he said he was open to suggestions. The listed items were in no order of priority, but simply a list of upcoming issues. Mr. Morrissey said when he had more detail he would spread out the projects over the year so as to track them.

Chair Burkholder led a discussion of the various upcoming projects/issues, with input from Councilor Atherton, Councilor Monroe, Mr. Morrissey, Andy Cotugno, Planning Director, and Ms. Christine Deffebach, Principal Transportation Planner. Out of this, Mr. Cotugno added and Chair Burkholder agreed to add to the work program ongoing discussions regarding federal funding categories, and specifically in February for funding appropriations in order to have some closure by May on funding authorizations. Major Upgrades to Existing Systems was a possible new category that Mr. Cotugno said this region would be very interested in.

There was also discussion on the Borders and Corridors category; Chair Burkholder said this, too, would be added to the work program. Also discussed and added were the state legislature special sessions, with regular updates and how to interact with them. Mr. Cotugno said historically it’s been difficult to have a regional consensus process on legislative priorities because the delegation is so diverse in that they don’t function as a unit because they have different perspectives. He added that he thought this might be a big task and suggested having this conversation with JPACT, to which Councilor Monroe agreed. Mr. Cotugno reminded the committee that the reason Metro works with the jurisdictions to coordinate the federal priorities letter is because Metro is the MPO and the dollars come through Metro.

On another side of the topic, Chair Burkholder said that since he was also chair of the Budget and Finance Committee this year, he would be bringing up transportation finance issues. He mentioned a Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), long-term planning, specifically Damascus, HB 2142 (passed January 26 in Salem), more on the Regional Framework Plan amendments that affect transportation, and corridor studies. Mr. Cotugno added that TMAs should be on the committee’s radar, that their funding would need to be looked at, and MTIP allocations to Tri-Met and how that money is spent based on their five-year plan. Chair Burkholder said Tri-Met’s service area was changing, and they could possibly be losing some of their transit areas and would like to know where they were headed.

Councilor Atherton said he would like to see this committee seriously address a regional trunk greenways trail system. We’re so close, he said, and it would be so good to highlight the project, go after it, and get it done. Mr. Morrissey said this was on the Parks Department’s work plan, and that they are taking it before the Natural Resources Committee. Chair Burkholder asked that the same presentation be given to this committee, with the emphasis on the transportation perspective.

Another suggestion from Councilor Atherton was looking at bus transit oriented developments (BODs), or bus/pedestrian oriented developments (BPODs), that those same projects were done for light rail, why not for bus, bike, pedestrian or others. Mr. Cotugno said this would be coming up during the MTIP evaluation process.

3a.  Citizen Communications. Mr. John Hepler of northeast Portland spoke to the committee about fences on McLoughlin Boulevard and augmented transportation utilizing small buses.

4.  I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership, Preliminary Recommendations. Ms. Chris Deffebach spoke to her distributed handout and map (made a part of this record), as well as the Working Draft Strategic Plan Recommendations for Public Review (from the agenda packet) that she said had been circulated for pubic review in December. She summarized the highlights of this report and said this was the time for Metro to forward any recommendation(s) to the I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership task force. Recommendations, she said, would come back to JPACT and to Metro’s Transportation Committee, and then to the Metro Council.

Chair Burkholder asked Mr. Morrissey to schedule a date for this to be discussed, formally, at this committee. Mr. Morrissey suggested that Ms. Deffebach provide the committee with a one to two-page monthly update on this project. The end of May to mid-June would be the time to comment on the report, Ms. Deffebach said.

There was discussion on how this project seemed to be centered in the north, particularly Washington State and Clark County and less so on the Oregon portion of the extreme northern end of Interstate 5, and was it beneficial to Oregon. Ms. Deffebach countered that it was an Oregon issue if it took traffic off the road. Councilor Monroe added that the Portland Meadows/Delta Park area being preserved as an exclusive industrial use was imperative, and said that the HOV lane was also an important factor in this project. Chair Burkholder commented that this was a study on the I-5 corridor, not just a small sector of the highway, and that Interstate 5 ran through downtown Portland as well as downtown Vancouver. These other sections needed to be looked at, as well, and he mentioned I-205, saying that also crossed the Columbia River. The difference between the two highways was then discussed, as well as the suggestion of relooking at main routes vs. bypass routes.

Councilor Monroe, a member of the Bi-State Transportation Committee as well as Chair of JPACT, added that there were many, many options available and the project was being looked at regionally, which would also help attract federal dollars when the time came for looking at financing. He also mentioned the HOV lane in Washington and how controversial it was there. When Councilor Monroe mentioned that there were formal briefings to the Bi-State Committee on this project, Chair Burkholder asked him to alert Metro’s Transportation Committee on issues and to relay Transportation Committee communication to the Bi-State Committee.

4a.  MTIP Air Quality Conformity Determination. Mr. Terry Whisler, Principal Transportation Planner, requested a public hearing before the committee on February 21, 2002, in order to take public comments on the MTIP air quality conformity determination. The reason for this request at this meeting was because legal notification of that hearing needed to be send for publication this date. Chair Burkholder granted the request.

There being no further business before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Rooney Barker

Council Assistant

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 17, 2002

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

Testimony cards. None.