DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study November 2020 Final Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study i Metro respects civil rights Metro fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes that ban discrimination. If any person believes they have been discriminated against regarding the receipt of benefits or services because of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability, they have the right to file a complaint with Metro. For information on Metro’s civil rights program, or to obtain a discrimination complaint form, visit www.oregonmetro.gov/civilrights or call 503-797-1536. Metro provides services or accommodations upon request to persons with disabilities and people who need an interpreter at public meetings. If you need a sign language interpreter, communication aid, or language assistance, call 503-797-1700 or TDD/TTY 503-797-1804 (8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays) five business days before the meeting. All Metro meetings are wheelchair accessible. For up-to-date public transportation information, visit TriMet’s website at www.trimet.org. Metro is the federally mandated metropolitan planning organization designated by the governor to develop an overall transportation plan and to allocate federal funds for the region. The Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) is a 17-member committee that provides a forum for elected officials and representatives of agencies involved in transportation to evaluate transportation needs in the region and to make recommendations to the Metro Council. The established decision-making process assures a well-balanced regional transportation system and involves local elected officials directly in decisions that help the Metro Council develop regional transportation policies, including allocating transportation funds. Project web site: https://www.oregonmetro.gov/tools-partners/guides-and-tools/jurisdictional- transfer-assessment ii Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study Acknowledgments Metro Margi Bradway Tom Kloster John Mermin Oregon Department of Transportation Mandy Putney Glen Bolen Project Steering Committee Margi Bradway, Metro Tom Kloster, Metro Mandy Putney, ODOT Art Pearce, Portland Bureau of Transportation Kristin Hull, Portland Bureau of Transportation Jessica Berry, Multnomah County Chris Fick, Multnomah County Chris Deffebach, Washington County Stephen Roberts, Washington County Mike Bezner, Clackamas County Bernie Bottomly, TriMet Metro Council, JPACT, TPAC Consultants WSP Kirsten Pennington Liz Antin Geoff Gibson Mike Mason John Maloney Zoie Wesenberg Emily Wolff JLA Brandy Steffen Jaye Cromwell Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study iii Table of contents List of Abbreviations and Acronyms .........................................vi Executive Summary ....................................................................vii 1. Introduction .............................................................................1 2. Policy framework ....................................................................3 2.1 Roadway classifications ...........................................................................................................3 2.2 Legal considerations and legal process for transfer in Oregon ..............................6 2.3 Jurisdictional transfer process and considerations ......................................................8 3. Methodologies ........................................................................13 3.1 Round 1: Preliminary screening ...........................................................................................14 3.2 Round 2a: technical evaluation ............................................................................................15 3.3 Round 2b: readiness evaluation ..........................................................................................15 3.4 Equity considerations ..............................................................................................................16 4. Findings ....................................................................................19 4.1 Most promising candidates for jurisdictional transfer ................................................19 4.2 Round 1: preliminary screening results ............................................................................22 4.3 Round 2a: technical evaluation results .............................................................................24 4.4 Round 2b: Readiness Evaluation Results ..........................................................................27 5. Needs and deficiencies ...........................................................31 6. Cost estimating methodology ...............................................33 6.1 State of good repair .................................................................................................................34 6.2 Capital needs ..............................................................................................................................34 6.3 Maintenance and operation costs ......................................................................................35 6.4 Ownership costs ........................................................................................................................35 7. Conclusion ...............................................................................37 iv Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study Table of contents List of figures Figure ES-1: Corridors identified as promising candidates for jurisdictional transfer ............................................x Figure ES-2: Screening, technical evaluation and readiness evaluation process ......................................................ix Figure 2-1. Jurisdictional transfer process ................................................................................................................................9 Figure 2-2. Best practices for communication during a jurisdictional transfer process .........................................11 Figure 3-1. Metro RTP’s four pillars ............................................................................................................................................14 Figure 3-2: Metro’s Equity Focus Areas with the 17 arterial highway segments ......................................................18 Figure 4-1: Corridors identified as promising candidates for jurisdictional transfer ...............................................20 Figure 4-2. Round 1: preliminary screening results ..............................................................................................................23 Figure 4-3. Round 2a: technical evaluation results ...............................................................................................................26 Figure 4-4. Round 2b: readiness evaluation results ..............................................................................................................28 Figure 6-1. Seven steps to bring a corridor segment to a SOGR ....................................................................................34 List of tables Table 3-1. Metro’s regional averages for demographic data ............................................................................................17 Table 4-1. Round 1: Segments designated as OHP Expressway or RTP Throughway .............................................22-24 Table 4-2. Round 2a: Segments that scored high in the technical assessment .........................................................24-25 Table 4-3. Round 2b: Segments that scored high in the readiness assessment........................................................27 Attachments A. Inventory of Non-Interstate Highways .....................................................................................................................39 B. Policy Framework ..............................................................................................................................................................83 C. Corridor Segment Selection Methodology and Evaluation Results ..............................................................105 D. Equity Considerations .....................................................................................................................................................139 E. Needs and Deficiencies Assessment .........................................................................................................................165 F. Cost Estimating Methodology .....................................................................................................................................215 G. Roadway Classification Change Recommendations ............................................................................................229 Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study v List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ADA American with Disabilities Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HB House Bill HDM Highway Design Manual HWY Highway I- Interstate IGA Intergovernmental agreement JPACT Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation MPAs Metropolitan Planning Areas NHS National Highway System OAR Oregon Administrative Rule ODOT Oregon Department of Transportation OHP Oregon Highway Plan ROW Right of way RTP Regional Transportation Plan Study Regional Framework for Highway Jurisdictional Transfer Study TSP Transportation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2005–2006 Assessment of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities of the Tualatin River Basin, Oregon
    FINAL REPORT 2005–2006 ASSESSMENT OF FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES OF THE TUALATIN RIVER BASIN, OREGON MICHAEL B. COLE JENA L. LEMKE CHRISTOPHER R. CURRENS PREPARED FOR CLEAN WATER SERVICES HILLSBORO, OREGON PREPARED BY ABR, INC.–ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH & SERVICES FOREST GROVE, OREGON 2005-2006 ASSESSMENT OF FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES OF THE TUALATIN RIVER BASIN, OREGON FINAL REPORT Prepared for Clean Water Services 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, OR 97123-9379 By Michael B. Cole, Jena L. Lemke, and Christopher Currens ABR, Inc.--Environmental Research and Services P.O. Box 249 Forest Grove, OR 97116 August 2006 Printed on recycled paper. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RIVPACS O/E scores from high-gradient reaches ranged from 0.24 to 1.05 and averaged • Biological monitoring with fish and 0.72, while multimetric scores ranged from 11 macroinvertebrate communities is widely used to 46 and averaged 27.9. The two approaches to determine the ecological integrity of surface produced similar impairment-class groupings, waters. Such surveys directly assess the status as almost half of the high-gradient-reach of surface waters relative to the primary goal macroinvertebrate communities that scored as of the Clean Water Act and provide unimpaired according to O/E scores also information valuable to water quality planning received unimpaired multimetric scores. and management. As such, fish and Upper Gales Creek received both the highest macroinvertebrate communities are O/E and multimetric scores of 1.05 and 46, periodically assessed by Clean Water Services respectively. Three sites received “fair” O/E to assist with water quality management in the scores ranging from 0.779 to 0.877.
    [Show full text]
  • Existing Conditions
    Hillsboro Transportation System Plan EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 Contents 3.1 Hillsboro Context.............................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Current Trends ................................................................................................................. 6 Increasing Population and Land Area .......................................................................................... 6 Increased Ethnic and Racial Diversity .......................................................................................... 8 Increasing Employment and Housing ........................................................................................ 11 Commute Patterns ..................................................................................................................... 15 3.3 Roadways 20 Number of Lanes ........................................................................................................................ 23 Speed Zones ............................................................................................................................... 23 Creek and Rail Crossings ............................................................................................................ 24 Average Daily Traffic .................................................................................................................. 29 Signalized Intersections ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Mobility Policy Update Examples of Current Approaches | Overview Oregonmetro.Gov/Mobility
    Regional Mobility Policy Update Examples of Current Approaches | Overview oregonmetro.gov/mobility April 2021 This overview and the factsheets OC NOTGNIHSAW OOC OC HAMONTLUM OOC C Introduction C N that follow summarize current H O in BBlvl A Pla vd Metro and the Oregon T urth P M o G E¡¢ £F C¤¥¥ A¥¦¢ practices related to how the R NNEE Four O N I Department of Transportation N mobility policy in the RTP and H T L S U (ODOT) are working together A M the OHP are used in different M W d R N Marine Dr s to update the policy on s s s a planning applications and a P P s us P u N how mobility is defined and N VancouverVancouver i li identify opportunities for l W C e S o n t l measured in the Portland area r H u improvement in an updated o e m C C le b n ia U s B in the Regional Transportation W llv e C L A R K C O R v NNEE M N v ariinen D L ARK policy. The factsheets were d d e Dr A MUMULTNOMAH C CO O r LTNOMAH Plan (RTP), local transportation e v Camas d developed through document n d v v C e e l N l O B B D L D system plans (TSPs), and when oombm r b r review and interviews conducted aar J N rd N WWashougalashougal St g In I nng J evaluating the traffic impacts n i te with agency staff on 12 examples t K N e E r r ve r NNEE KKilliilling swo e s s rthth Airp t t 3 o h of local comprehensive plan A S rt d a NW Yeon Ave t t WWaa NE Ma r R of recent system plans, plan R y rinnee DD t u e e NE Sandy Blvd Y L s s eon Sandy s A n Luther K amendments.
    [Show full text]
  • The City of Banks Oregon the City of Banks
    PREPARED FOR: THE CITY OF BANKS, OREGON PREPARED BY: WITH SUPPORT FROM: OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON OCTOBER 2010 CONTENTS Section Page 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Planning Process ...................................................................................................................... 2 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Operations and Traffic Analysis ........................................................................... 14 Regulatory Envirnoment ....................................................................................................... 20 Future Traffic Analysis .......................................................................................................... 21 3 Alternatives Evaluation and Recommendations .............................................................. 34 Concepts to Address Needs Identified in TSP Analysis.................................................... 35 Concepts to Service Expanded UGB Areas ......................................................................... 46 Future Functional Classification of Roadways ................................................................... 59
    [Show full text]
  • Milebymile.Com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #47
    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #47 Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 Junction: Clatskanie, Junction United States Highway #30, Clatskanie, Oregon, a city in Oregon Columbia County, Oregon, located on the banks of the Clatskanie River, a tributary of the Columbia River, The Clatskanie River empties into the Columbia River within the city limits. This is where Oregon Route #47 ends (at its northern terminus). Altitude: 20 feet 1.4 Palm Hill Road/Gas Palm Hill Road/Gas Pipeline Road, Entrance to, Clatskanie Guard Pipeline Road Station, of the Oregon State Department of Forestry, Altitude: 230 feet 11.8 Junction Junction Oregon Route #202/Nehalem Highway, Mist, Oregon, a community in Columbia County, Oregon, Mist contains one of the very few, and therefore very valuable, natural gas storage areas in the Pacific Northwest. Altitude: 531 feet 15.5 OBlack Lane OBlack Lane, Burns Road, Community of Natal, Oregon, Altitude: 528 feet 18.9 Apiary Market Road Apiary Market Road, winds through the Forest Grove District State Forest, meets Camp Wilkerson Road, Enterprise Road, Camp Wilkerson, offers camping sites, facilities, Cabins in the thickly wooded areas of Forest Grove District State Forest, Altitude: 558 feet 19.9 Big Eddy Park Big Eddy Park, located between Nehalem River and Oregon Route #47, Altitude: 571 feet 22.7 Scappoose-Vernonia Scappoose-Vernonia Highway, columbia Forest Road, Scaponia Highway: Recreation Site Columbia County Park, Scaponia Recreation Site, The Portland and Southwestern Railroad Tunnel near Scappoose, Oregon, a registered National Historic Place, Altitude: 584 feet 23.1 Crooked Creek Mountain Crooked Creek Mountain Lane, Pittsburg, Oregon, a community in Lane Columbia County, Oregon, located on the Nehalem River, Altitude: 587 feet 27.3 Vernonia, Oregon Vernonia, Oregon, a city in Columbia County, Oregon, located on the Nehalem River, on Oregon Route #47, in a valley on the western side of the Northern Oregon Coast Range.
    [Show full text]
  • 1999 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN Including Amendments November 1999 Through May 2015
    1999 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN Including amendments November 1999 through May 2015 An Element of the Oregon Transportation Plan THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Copyright © 1999 by the Oregon Department of Transportation Permission is given to quote and reproduce parts of this document if credit is given to the source. A copy of this plan and amendments as the Oregon Transportation Commission adopted them are on file at the Oregon Department of Transportation and online at: https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Planning/Pages/Plans.aspx#OHP. Editorial changes for consistency have been made in this document. Amendments Incorporated into May 2015 version of 1999 OHP 99-01: Highway Reclassification (9 November 1999) 00-02: Expressway Classification (11 May 2000) 00-03: Expressway Classifications and Technical Corrections (7 June 2000) 00-04: Alternate Mobility Standards; RVMPO and Metro (13 December 2000) 01-05: Expressway Classifications (11 April 2001) 01-06: Conditional Designation of STAs and Designation of UBAs (9 August 2001) 02-07: Jurisdictional Transfers (November 2002) 03-08: Bypass Policy (16 April 2003) 03-09: Amendment of Appendix E: NHS Intermodal Connectors (18 June 2003) 04-10: Amended Policy 1B (14 January 2004) 04-11: Highway Segment Designations (14 January 2004) 04-11: Highway Segment Designation Maps (14 January 2004) 04-12: Technical Corrections to the Oregon Highway Plan (2 July 2004) 04-13: Technical Corrections to the Oregon Highway Plan (20 December 2004) 05-14: Designation of Special Transportation Areas (10 January 2005)
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Transportation Baseline Report
    Transportation Baseline Report Oak Street Refinement Plan Forest Grove, Oregon DRAFT August 2020 Draft Transportation Baseline Report Project Information Project: Oak Street Refinement Plan Prepared for: 3J Consulting 9600 SW Nimbus Avenue, Suite 100 Beaverton, Oregon 97008 Reviewing Agency Jurisdiction : Forest Grove 1924 Council Street Forest Grove, Oregon 97116 Project Representative Prepared by : SCJ Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98516 360.352.1465 scjalliance.com Contact : Anne Sylvester, PTE [email protected] (360) 352-1465 Project Reference: SCJ 1902 .01 Path: N:\Projects\1902 3J Consulting, Inc\1902.01 Forest Grove Oak Street Area Land Use Refinement\04-Dels\01-Baseline\Transp\2020-0808 Draft Oak Street Area Transp Baseline.docx Oak Street Refinement Plan Draft Transportation Baseline Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................ 1-1 2. REVIEWED DOCUMENTS AND PLANS ....................................................................... 2-1 2.1 State Documents and Plans ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Regional Documents and Plans .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Forest Grove Documents and Plans ................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Washington County Documents and Plans .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Date: January 27, 2021 To: Board of Directors From: Doug
    Date: January 27, 2021 To: Board of Directors From: Doug Kelsey Subject: ORDINANCE NO. 362 OF THE TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT OF OREGON (TRIMET) RETROACTIVELY ADOPTING APRIL 2020 AND AUGUST 2020 SERVICE CHANGES AND UPDATING ROUTE DESIGNATIONS (FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING) 1. Purpose of Ite m Ordinance 362 requests that the TriMet Board of Directors (Board) retroactively adopt service changes and revise route designations now described in TriMet Code Chapter 22, Section 22.05. 2. Type of Agenda Item Initial Contract Contract Modification Other: Ordinance 3. Reason for Board Action The Board may adopt service changes and revise TriMet Code route designations only by adoption of an Ordinance. 4. Type of Action Resolution Ordinance 1st Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance 2nd Reading 5. Background In response to dramatic losses in ridership and adoption of health precautions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, TriMet implemented urgent service changes on April 5, 2020 and August 31, 2020. The first set of service changes were put in place on April 5, 2020 in response to a precipitous fall in ridership due to the outbreak of the pandemic. TriMet staff quickly developed a service reduction plan intended to protect transit service levels provided to low-income and minority communities, hospitals, and major job centers with a high percentage of low-wage jobs. The April 5, 2020 service reduction plan included: • No change in weekday service levels for 24 of 85 bus lines (28% of all lines) • Weekday service adjustments to 61 of 85 bus lines (72% of all lines) • Bus lines receiving weekday service adjustments transitioned from weekday service to Saturday service; lines without Saturday service had their weekday service modified to a lower level; span of service (later or earlier) was adjusted to accommodate demand • Bus lines with weekend service were adjusted to Sunday service for the entire weekend • Weekday MAX service was adjusted to operate every 15 min.
    [Show full text]
  • 2795 Se Tv Highway Prime Owner/User Retail Property with Income in Densely Populated Area of Portland Msa
    YOUR BUSINESS HERE 2795 SE TV HIGHWAY PRIME OWNER/USER RETAIL PROPERTY WITH INCOME IN DENSELY POPULATED AREA OF PORTLAND MSA ASHTON SUMMERS BRAD MACOMBER ASSOCIATE SENIOR ADVISOR 503.218.4380 503.218.4380 [email protected] [email protected] OR 201228656 | WA 140840 OR 200908061 | WA 95748 commercialintegritynw.com LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information contained in this marketing brochure is proprietary and strictly confidential. It is intended to be reviewed only by the party receivingYOUR it from Commercial BUSINESS Integrity, NW HEREand should not be made available to any other persons or entities without written consent of Commercial Integrity, NW. The information contained herein has been prepared to provide summary, unverified financial and physical information to prospective purchasers to establish a preliminary level of interest in the Subject Property. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL NOT BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR A THOROUGH DUE DILIGENCE INVESTIGATION. Commercial Integrity, NW has not made any investigation, and makes no warranty or representation with respect to the income or expense for the Subject Property, the future projected financial performance of the Subject Property, the size or square footage and improvements, the presence or absence of contaminating substances, PCBs or asbestos, the compliance with local, state and federal regulations, the physical condition of the improvements thereon, or financial condition or business prospects of any tenant, or any tenant’s plan or intentions to continue to occupy the Subject Property. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however, Commercial Integrity, NW has not verified and will not verify, any of the information contained herein, nor has Commercial Integrity, NW conducted any investigation regarding these matters and makes no warranty or representation whatsoever regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Date, NR Number
    Oregon Department of Transportation News Release Region 1 Columbia, Washington, Multnomah, Clackamas and Hood River Counties March 16, 2012 12-18 For More Information: Kimberly Dinwiddie, (503) 731-8281 E-mail: [email protected] AREA ROAD CONSTRUCTION: MARCH 17 - 24, 2012 Interstate 5 (Pacific Highway) Iowa Street Viaduct Replacement: A contractor is working to replace a viaduct on I-5 that crosses a ravine at SW Iowa Street (milepost 298) just north of Terwilliger Boulevard (exit 297) and just south of Corbett Avenue (exit 298). The project includes building a temporary detour bridge on the west side of I-5. The hiking trail that crosses under I-5 connecting Terwilliger Boulevard to Corbett Street remains closed during this project. During the week of Monday, March 19, through Friday, March 23, the contractor will work on the east side of the freeway building retaining walls, new bridge columns, working on electrical systems and widening shoulders. This work requires daytime shoulder closures in both directions on I-5 in the project area. Motorists should expect trucks entering and exiting the northbound lanes of I-5 from the worksite between 7:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. The speed limit on I-5 is reduced to 50 mph in the work area. This speed reduction is in effect 24 hours a day and will remain in place for the duration of the project. Please be alert to enhanced police traffic patrols in the work area. For more information: www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION1/iowaviaduct/ Interstate 5 (Pacific Highway) Holladay Street to Marquam Bridge: Work is under way on a project to install variable speed limit signs on I-5 and I-405 in the Portland area and to perform concrete repairs and bridge deck work on I-5 between Holladay Street in the Rose Quarter and the north end of the Marquam Bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Clatsop County, Oregon and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 1 OF 2 CLATSOP COUNTY, OREGON AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ASTORIA, CITY OF 410028 CANNON BEACH, CITY OF 410029 CLATSOP COUNTY 410027 UNINCORPORATED AREAS GEARHART, CITY OF 410030 SEASIDE, CITY OF 410032 WARRENTON, CITY OF 410033 REVISED: June 20, 2018 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 41007CV001B Version Number 2.3.2.0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1 Page SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The National Flood Insurance Program 1 1.2 Purpose of this Flood Insurance Study Report 2 1.3 Jurisdictions Included in the Flood Insurance Study Project 2 1.4 Considerations for using this Flood Insurance Study Report 4 SECTION 2.0 – FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS 14 2.1 Floodplain Boundaries 14 2.2 Floodways 14 2.3 Base Flood Elevations 19 2.4 Non-Encroachment Zones 19 2.5 Coastal Flood Hazard Areas 19 2.5.1 Water Elevations and the Effects of Waves 19 2.5.2 Floodplain Boundaries and BFEs for Coastal Areas 21 2.5.3 Coastal High Hazard Areas 22 2.5.4 Limit of Moderate Wave Action 23 SECTION 3.0 – INSURANCE APPLICATIONS 23 3.1 National Flood Insurance Program Insurance Zones 23 3.2 Coastal Barrier Resources System 24 SECTION 4.0 – AREA STUDIED 24 4.1 Basin Description 24 4.2 Principal Flood Problems 25 4.3 Non-Levee Flood Protection Measures 27 4.4 Levees 28 SECTION 5.0 – ENGINEERING METHODS 31 5.1 Hydrologic Analyses 31 5.2 Hydraulic Analyses 37 5.3 Coastal Analyses 41 5.3.1 Total Stillwater Elevations 42 5.3.2 Waves 44 5.3.3 Coastal Erosion 44 5.3.4 Wave Hazard Analyses 44 5.4 Alluvial Fan Analyses 54 SECTION 6.0 – MAPPING
    [Show full text]
  • Washington County LIT Meeting 4: Tualatin Valley Highway Meeting: Metro Local Investment Team, Washington County Date/Time: August 19Th, 2019
    Washington County LIT Meeting 4 (TV Highway) Washington County LIT Meeting 4: Tualatin Valley Highway Meeting: Metro Local Investment Team, Washington County Date/time: August 19th, 2019. 6:30 pm to 9 pm Place: Beaverton City Hall Council Chambers, 12725 SW Millikan Way, Beaverton, OR Purpose: Tour Tualatin Valley Highway, review project concepts and gather LIT member feedback. Attendance LIT Members Eman Abbas Sarah Beachy Tom Hughes Nina Kung Felicita Monteblanco Sushmita Poddar Piyawee Ruenjinda Jerome Sibayan Staff Anthony Buczek, Metro Tyler Frisbee, Metro Victor Sin, Metro Camilla Dartnell, Kittelson & Associates, Inc Allison Brown, JLA Public Involvement Travis Rumohr, JLA Public Involvement General Public Marah Danielson, ODOT Chris Deffebach, Washington County Craig Dirksen, Metro Savannah Edson, Matt Freitag, Oregon Department of Transportation Luis Hernandez, Cornelius Inna Levin, Metro/Task Force Ahne Oosterhof Stephen Robert, Washington County Gregory Robertson, Washington County Walter Robinson II, Getting There Together Charri Schairer, Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation District Dick Schouten, Washington County Board of Commissioners Jean Senechal Biggs, City of Beaverton Anna Slatinsky, City of Beaverton 1 Washington County LIT Meeting 4 (TV Highway) Jamie Snook, TriMet Pete Truax, City of Forest Grove Jessica Vega Pederson, Multnomah County/T2020 Erin Wardell, Washington County Summary of Discussion Members were primarily concerned about safety issues along the corridor and access for those that work and live along the corridor. There was also concern that such a long corridor, with so many issues, might be too expensive to address in a complete way, and that consideration would have to be given to priority projects. Other issues, such as equitable access and problems with projected growth were brought up, but the primary focus was on safety issues and transit access.
    [Show full text]