DOCSLIB.ORG

C-TRAN Board of Directors February 12, 2013 Minutes Page 1 of 15 C

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

C-TRAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES February 12, 2013 The C-TRAN Board of Directors meeting was held Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at C-TRAN Administrative Facility, 2425 NE 65th Avenue, Vancouver, Washington 98661. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bill Ganley called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Smith led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS PRESENT: Connie Jo Freeman, Bill Ganley, Bart Hansen, Roy Jennings, Tim Leavitt, David Madore, Tom Mielke, Jim Irish, Larry Smith, ABSENT: Steve Stuart None STAFF PRESENT Executive Director/CEO Jeff Hamm, Legal Counsel Tom Wolfendale, Director of Operations Lynn Halsey, Director of Development & Public Affairs Scott Patterson, Director of Maintenance John Hoefs, Director of Administrative Services Diane O’Regan, Operations Chief Debra Wright, Senior Manager of Development & Public Affairs Jim Quintana, Senior Human Resources Manager Julie DeBoever, Senior Manager of Information Technology Bob McMahan, Passenger Service Manager Walt Gordon, Senior Planner Tom Shook, Executive Assistant/Clerk of the Board Debbie Jermann CHANGES TO AND APPROVAL OF THE BOARD AGENDA LARRY SMITH MOTIONED, TIM LEAVITT SECONDED, AND MOTION CARRIED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION TO THE BOARD STEVE HERMAN, Vancouver, WA thanked the Board for their support of the November 2012 vote, and asked for consideration of a straight yes or no vote on the proposed light rail project. C-TRAN Board of Directors February 12, 2013 Minutes Page 1 of 15 CAROLYN CRAIN, Vancouver, WA stated there is proposed legislation in Olympia that has light rail implications and violate eminent domain, and could result in public property disposition for less than market value. Ms. Crain said this would be a violation of private property rights. Ms. Crain urged the Board to slow down and look at what is happening with the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project. JIM KARLOCK, Portland, OR questioned the analysis for estimated jobs for the CRC project, and suggested that tolls could result in job loss. Mr. Karlock questioned tax incentives that result in development rather than transit. MARK MAGGIORA, Vancouver, WA presented a petition (see Exhibit A) from a grass roots group who wished to see BRT on Fourth Plain move forward. The petition requests that: 1) BRT be separated from the CRC project; 2) Fund the BRT project within existing C-TRAN resources without raising taxes; and 3) Use the $800,000 annual cost savings from operation BRT to replenish C-TRAN’s capital reserves while reinvesting some of the savings to other C-TRAN routes. Mr. Maggiora stated the petitions contain over 250 signatures from the Fourth Plain Corridor. Mr. Maggiora stated they believe the BRT project is necessary and would be a valuable resource for the Fourth Plain Corridor. JUDY TIFFANY, Vancouver, WA submitted a map (see Exhibit B) showing the results of the November 2012 Proposition 1 vote, which shows that the Fourth Plain Corridor approved Proposition 1 by a vote of 52% approval and 48% rejection. Ms. Tiffany said the BRT project would add needed lighting at stops, provide efficiency for wheelchair lifts, and help on-time performance. MADISON SYVERSON, Vancouver, WA stated she is a Clark College student and bike commuter. The current buses used only allow two bicycles on the bike rack. If the bike rack is full, you need to wait for the next bus. BRT vehicles have more room for bicycles and those vehicles would run with increased frequency. Ms. Syverson said that as she was collecting signatures for the petition, she spoke with other Clark College students who thanked her for her work to improve bus frequency. Ms. Syverson stated a modern efficient bus system on Fourth Plain would be an asset. RICH BARANZANO, Portland, OR stated he is a Fourth Plain business owner and believes BRT is an economic catalyst for the corridor. Mr. Baranzano shared reports entitled “Portland Streetcar Development Oriented Transit” (April 2008), “Streetcar-Development Linkage: The Portland Streetcar Loop” (February 2008), TRB 2012 Annual Meeting BRT and Economic Development Case Study of the Eugene-Springfield Oregon BRT System (November 2011), and USA Today article entitled “Portland Streetcar Success Has Fueled Interest Elsewhere” (August 2010). These reports are attached to these minutes as Exhibit C. MADELEINE VON LANE, Vancouver, WA submitted a list of BRT quotes from notable groups or individuals (Exhibit D). During the recession, it has been difficult for young people to find jobs. Many students do not have a car and take public transportation due to the cost of car ownership. If you do drive to school, you have to arrive early to ensure a parking spot. Ms. Von Lane stated BRT will help preserve resources for a sustainable future. C-TRAN Board of Directors February 12, 2013 Minutes Page 2 of 15 HARRY KIICK, Vancouver, WA stated he has ridden C-TRAN for 17 years, and used to live in the Fourth Plain Corridor. Mr. Kiick stated he has watched C-TRAN try to keep up with demand on Fourth Plain as the population has increased. Mr. Kiick said he has attended many meetings with business leaders along Fourth Plain, many have stated when C-TRAN adds new stops, and landscaping for BRT, the property owners on the corridor would provide additional landscape improvements to their property. Mr. Kiick added that the CRC and BRT are two separate issues and should be acted on separately. Written Testimony: JASON HOOVER, Vancouver, WA submitted an e-mail dated February 12, 2013, regarding C-TRAN Board meetings on CVTV, BRT on Fourth Plain, and CRC/Light Rail to Vancouver (attached to these minutes as Exhibit E). PUBLIC HEARING 1. PROPOSED CHANGES TO ROUTE 41 CAMAS/WASHOUGAL LIMITED Director of Development & Public Affairs Scott Patterson and Senior Planner Tom Shook introduced the proposed changes to Route 41 Camas/Washougal Limited. At the December 11, 2012 C-TRAN Board of Directors meeting, staff informed the Board of proposed service changes to Route 41 Camas/Washougal Limited and Route 7 Battle Ground. Only the proposal for Route 41 Camas/Washougal Limited requires a public hearing, but both routes are included in the May 2013 service change. The proposed changes include opportunities to provide more efficient and effective service without additional agency resources. Chair Ganley opened the public hearing. No one wished to testify. Chair Ganley closed the public hearing. CONSENT AGENDA 1. APPROVAL OF C-TRAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS JANUARY 8, 2013 MEETING MINUTES 2. TRANSMITTAL OF CLAIM VOUCHERS NUMBERED 096593 THROUGH 096984 PLUS NET PAYROLL PAID IN JANUARY 2013, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $3,633,189.62 Board Member David Madore pulled this item from the Consent Agenda. 3. 2013 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONTRACTED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS, STAFF REPORT #13-011 C-TRAN maintains a variety of contract maintenance service agreements with a variety of vendors as itemized in the budget for 2013. These maintenance contracts are a necessary part of systems operations and ongoing maintenance. These maintenance agreements vary in price and those exceeding the $25,000 threshold must be brought to the C-TRAN Board of Directors on an annual basis. In order to improve efficiency by reducing the number of staff reports required to renew these necessary services, several contracts have been included in this one staff report. Estimated contract maintenance costs over the $25,000 threshold, total $480,921. These costs cover agreements for the following C-TRAN Board of Directors February 12, 2013 Minutes Page 3 of 15 technical maintenance programs: Vendor Cost Description Asset Works $55,948 FA Fleet & Fuel Management Systems Day Wireless $52,000 Voice Radio Communications Maintenance Systems INIT $241,805 CAD/AVL, APC, MDT, ASA and Real-time Passenger Information products Tectura $63,036 Microsoft Great Plains Dynamics - Human Resources, Payroll, Finance & Accounting Software Trapeze $68,132 Paratransit Scheduling & Advance Traveler Information System (ATIS) Trip Planning Systems TOTAL $480,921 The cost of these services is included in the adopted budget, is reasonable, and monitored by C-TRAN staff. Typical increases are three to five percent annually. 4. DESIGNATED RECIPIENT OF FTA 5310 FUNDS (ENHANCED MOBILITY OF SENIORS & INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM), BOARD RESOLUTION BR-13-004, STAFF REPORT #13-005 The recent Federal Transportation Authorization Act, “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21)”, consolidated the New Freedom (Section 5317) and Elderly and Disabled (Section 5310) programs established under the former authorization bill, to create a new Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals With Disabilities Program. Section 5310 will provide formula grant funds for programs that serve the special needs of transit-dependent populations beyond traditional public transportation services and ADA complementary Paratransit. Several requirements must be fulfilled before the Portland-Vancouver region can receive Section 5310 funds: • The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) initiates a process to designate recipients of FTA 5310 funds within the metropolitan area; • Providers of publically owned transit services concur with the designation; • The Governors of Washington and Oregon identify the designated recipients for Section 5310 funding; and • FTA receives notification of designated recipient status. Public transit agencies are being proposed as designated recipients as they have the legal and administrative capacity to manage the FTA funds. As a designated recipient, C-TRAN would be required to coordinate with the Regional Transportation Council (RTC) in the project selection process, identify Section 5310 projects in the Human Services Transportation Plan, and program projects for funding in the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP). The RTC Board of Directors adopted a Resolution at their February 5, 2013 meeting, concurring that TriMet, C-TRAN, and SMART (Wilsonville, OR) be designated by the Governors of Washington and Oregon as recipients of FTA’s Section 5310 program funds allocated to the Portland-Vancouver C-TRAN Board of Directors February 12, 2013 Minutes Page 4 of 15 urbanized area.
Recommended publications
  • Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study

    Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study

    Portland Union Station Multimodal Conceptual Engineering Study Submitted to Portland Bureau of Transportation by IBI Group with LTK Engineering June 2009 This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. IBI GROUP PORtlAND UNION STATION MultIMODAL CONceptuAL ENGINeeRING StuDY IBI Group is a multi-disciplinary consulting organization offering services in four areas of practice: Urban Land, Facilities, Transportation and Systems. We provide services from offices located strategically across the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. JUNE 2009 www.ibigroup.com ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1: Introduction .....................................................................................1 Introduction 1 Study Purpose 2 Previous Planning Efforts 2 Study Participants 2 Study Methodology 4 Chapter 2: Existing Conditions .........................................................................6 History and Character 6 Uses and Layout 7 Physical Conditions 9 Neighborhood 10 Transportation Conditions 14 Street Classification 24 Chapter 3: Future Transportation Conditions .................................................25 Introduction 25 Intercity Rail Requirements 26 Freight Railroad Requirements 28 Future Track Utilization at Portland Union Station 29 Terminal Capacity Requirements 31 Penetration of Local Transit into Union Station 37 Transit on Union Station Tracks
  • NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon

    NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon

    Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Publications and Presentations Planning 6-24-2014 Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Jenny H. Liu Portland State University, [email protected] Zakari Mumuni Portland State University Matt Berggren Portland State University Matt Miller University of Utah Arthur C. Nelson University of Utah SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Transportation Commons, Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Liu, Jenny H.; Mumuni, Zakari; Berggren, Matt; Miller, Matt; Nelson, Arthur C.; and Ewing, Reid, "Do TODs Make a Difference? NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon" (2014). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 124. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson, and Reid Ewing This report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/124 NS Streetcar Line Portland, Oregon Do TODs Make a Difference? Jenny H. Liu, Zakari Mumuni, Matt Berggren, Matt Miller, Arthur C. Nelson & Reid Ewing Portland State University 6/24/2014 ______________________________________________________________________________ DO TODs MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 1 of 35 Section 1-INTRODUCTION 2 of 35 ______________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents 1-INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................
  • MAKING HISTORY 50 Years of Trimet and Transit in the Portland Region MAKING HISTORY

    MAKING HISTORY 50 Years of Trimet and Transit in the Portland Region MAKING HISTORY

    MAKING HISTORY 50 Years of TriMet and Transit in the Portland Region MAKING HISTORY 50 YEARS OF TRIMET AND TRANSIT IN THE PORTLAND REGION CONTENTS Foreword: 50 Years of Transit Creating Livable Communities . 1 Setting the Stage for Doing Things Differently . 2 Portland, Oregon’s Legacy of Transit . 4 Beginnings ............................................................................4 Twentieth Century .....................................................................6 Transit’s Decline. 8 Bucking National Trends in the Dynamic 1970s . 11 New Institutions for a New Vision .......................................................12 TriMet Is Born .........................................................................14 Shifting Gears .........................................................................17 The Freeway Revolt ....................................................................18 Sidebar: The TriMet and City of Portland Partnership .......................................19 TriMet Turbulence .....................................................................22 Setting a Course . 24 Capital Program ......................................................................25 Sidebar: TriMet Early Years and the Mount Hood Freeway ...................................29 The Banfield Project ...................................................................30 Sidebar: The Transportation Managers Advisory Committee ................................34 Sidebar: Return to Sender ..............................................................36
  • Transportation Funding Task Force: Trimet Update

    Transportation Funding Task Force: Trimet Update

    Transportation Funding Task Force: TriMet Update September 25th, 2019 Meeting Outline Welcome and Introduction Dr. Linda Simmons, TriMet Board Member and T2020 Task Force Member 1. Transit Equity and Inclusion, Low Income Fare Initiatives John Gardner - Director, Transit Equity, Inclusion and Community Affairs 2. Transit Service Update and Future Service Outlook Kerry Ayres-Palanuk – Director, Planning & Policy 3. Enhanced Transit and Better Bus Program Jamie Snook – Manager, Capital Planning 4. Regionally Significant Transit Priorities Dave Unsworth – Director, Project Development & Permitting Discussion with Task Force Members Bernie Bottomly - Executive Director, Public Affairs 2 1. Transit Equity and Inclusion, Low Income Fare Initiatives John Gardner Director of Transit Equity, Inclusion and Community Affairs TriMet’s Diversity at a glance TriMet’s Board • Majority women and men of color TriMet’s Executive Leadership • Majority women and men of color TriMet’s Staff reflects the Diversity of the Region TriMet’s Ridership • 37% of all trips on TriMet are taken by people of color • 40% of the trips taken by people of color are taken on MAX 4 Community Engagement • TEAC TriMet’s Transit Equity Advisory Committee is made up of the following organizations • Safety & Security • Youth Committee • Language Access Advisory Committee • Committee on Accessible Transportation • Riders Club ~59,500 • Launching newsletter for 170 community based organizations and system partners 5 Fare affordability & system access • Access Transit provides $1.3
  • West Broadway Transit Study Economic Development Impacts of Transit Alternatives

    West Broadway Transit Study Economic Development Impacts of Transit Alternatives

    West Broadway Transit Study Economic Development Impacts of Transit Alternatives 11/11/2015 Prepared by the SRF Consulting Group Team for Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 3 II. Baseline Development Scenario ............................................................................................................... 3 III. Literature Review & Case Study Findings ............................................................................................... 9 IV. Developer Interview Findings ................................................................................................................ 17 V. BRT and Streetcar Development Scenarios........................................................................................... 19 Appendix: Transit Economic Development Impacts Case Studies ............................................................. 24 West Broadway Transit Study 2 I. Introduction Metro Transit, in collaboration with Hennepin County and the Cities of Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, and Golden Valley, is seeking guidance on the economic development impacts of proposed streetcar and bus rapid transit (BRT) alternatives along the West Broadway corridor. As documented in the April 1, 2015 methodology statement, transit can support economic development by enhancing mobility and providing a placemaking amenity for the corridor. The Team developed a financial model in order to
  • Streetcar System Concept Plan a Framework for Future Corridor Planning and Alternatives Analysis

    Streetcar System Concept Plan a Framework for Future Corridor Planning and Alternatives Analysis

    PORTLAND STREETCAR SYSTEM CONCEPT PLAN A Framework for Future Corridor Planning and Alternatives Analysis Adopted September 9, 2009 by Portland City Council This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration How this document will be used This document will be used to identify and select corridors for future Alternatives Analysis and planning studies as funding becomes available. No funding plan or schedule has been identified for any of the potential streetcar projects. Transit corridors citywide were assessed to determine which corridors have the best potential for future streetcar investment. Corridors that are shown in this document represent the best opportunities for streetcar infrastructure. Detailed corridor by corridor analysis, study and discussions with corridor neighborhoods are necessary to determine if a streetcar investment is warranted. No individual corridor can move forward without a detailed analysis and planning study to address the purpose and need of a streetcar project and to comprehensively evaluate project impacts. The Portland Bureau of Transportation fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the ADA Title II, and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For accommodations and additional information, contact the Title II and Title VI Coordinator at Room 1204, 1120 SW 5th Ave, Portland, OR 97204, or by telephone 503-823-2559, City TTY 503-823-6868, or use Oregon Relay Service: 711. PORTLAND STREETCAR SYSTEM CONCEPT PLAN A Framework for Future Corridor Planning and Alternatives Analysis Adopted by Portland City Council September 9, 2009 Resolution 36732 Acknowledgements City of Portland Bureau of Transportation Sam Adams, Mayor, Commissioner of Public Utilities Susan D.
  • Extending Light Rail to the North

    Extending Light Rail to the North

    PHILADELPHIA THOMPSON SR-501 SUNSET -SYL V ERWIN O REIGER MEMORIAL AN SCHOLLS FERR SR-501 Y SUNSET PA TT SKYLINE ON WILLAMETTE SHA TTUCK T S HELENS YEON LOWER RIVER LOWER HUMPHREY POR TLAND 41ST W DOSCH SE ARD 36TH COLUMBIA LAKESHORE NICOLAI 31ST V BLISS AUGHN 93RD 1 19TH The Columbia River Crossing project(CRC) is expanding transit options between Portland and Vancouver. This bi-state project will extend an existing 52-mile light rail system across the Columbia River to connect the region’s largest and most concentrated employment area in downtown Portland with Vancouver. This extension will improve connections, reliability 23RD and travel times for riders. VIST A LOMBARD GREELEY HAYDEN ISLAND The Columbia River Crossing Project (CRC) is expanding transit options in Vancouver and will improve connections, reliability and travel times for riders. LAKESHORE 21ST 21ST W BROAD N MARINE DR MARINE N FRONT SIMPSON 94TH A N JANTZEN N Vancouver Y GOING 16TH N H BERNIE GREELEY A 18TH Y D A 109TH E VE LOVEJOY N I S L I405 A N 6TH D 11TH 11TH D LINCOLN R R FOU KAUFFMAN 9TH L 3RD 4TH LINCOLN B PLAIN TH 13TH ST 13TH 15TH ST 8TH ST 8TH T NAI Portland 149TH BARBUR 45TH O 139TH MCLOUGHLIN BL UNION ALDER VD L KEL HARBOR OREGON N T O N MARINE DR MARINE N M Y A H A COLUMBI N W A WASHINGTON ST HOOD W K MAIN ST I5 I S T ASHING VD L 39TH A N POR DELL Highway Improvements D BROADW Existing Highway and Bridge AY ST Proposed Light Rail Alignment ST 17TH Existing MAX Yellow Line HAZEL Proposed Park and Ride Proposed Light Rail Stations D L MARQUAM B R TLAND VD
  • Facts About Trimet

    Facts About Trimet

    Facts about TriMet Ridership TriMet is a national leader in providing transit service. TriMet carries more people than nearly every other U.S. transit system its size. Weekly ridership on buses and MAX has increased for all but one year in the past 23 years. TriMet ridership has outpaced population growth and daily vehicle miles traveled for more than a decade. During fiscal year 2011 Residents and visitors boarded a bus, MAX or WES train 100 million times: • 58.4 million were bus trips • 41.2 million were MAX trips • 370,800 were WES trips TriMet’s service area covers 570 square miles within the tri-county region with a Weekday boardings averaged population of 1.5 million people. 318,500 trips: • 190,300 were bus trips Portland is the 24th-largest metro easing traffic congestion and helping • 126,800 were MAX trips area in the U.S., but transit ridership keep our air clean. That adds up to • 1,450 were WES trips is 7th per capita. 28.6 million fewer car trips each year. Weekend ridership: More people ride TriMet than transit TriMet’s MAX and buses combined systems in larger cities, such as eliminate 207,300 daily car trips, or • Bus and MAX ridership averaged Dallas, Denver and San Diego. 65 million trips each year. 343,900 trips. For each mile taken on TriMet, 53% Maintaining livability less carbon is emitted compared to Easing traffic congestion driving alone. MAX carries 26% of evening rush- Annual Ridership Growth Bus, MAX & WES hour commuters traveling from 105 downtown on the Sunset Hwy.
  • Self-Guided Tour of Urban Design Precedents

    Self-Guided Tour of Urban Design Precedents

    Self-Guided Tour Urban Design Precedents Introduction This packet contains 7 self-guided tours of successful public and private spaces in the Milwaukie area. These precedents (and others) could be models for development in downtown Milwaukie. The tour is designed to be an opportunity to experience each place; identify the characteristics that make them unique and successful; and consider how various components might work in downtown Milwaukie. Each page notes the components of the space that are particularly relevant. The Tour The below list is a suggested tour route. If you visit the sites in the order listed, your route from Milwaukie will take you counter-clockwise to the east, north, and west. You can also reverse the order to end at Belmont Dairy. A map is provided on the back of this page. 1. Belmont Dairy, SE Belmont and Morrison between SE 34th and 35th 2. Esther Short Park, 301 W 8th Ave, Vancouver 3. Mississippi Marketplace, N Mississippi Ave and N Skidmore St 4. Laughing Planet Plaza, N Mississippi Ave between Beech and Failing 5. Jamison Square, 810 NW 11th Ave 6. Director Park, 815 SW Park Ave 7. Millennium Plaza, 200 1st St, Lake Oswego If You Have Time… If you are interested in additional examples, the following may also be of interest: • SW Pennoyer St, South Waterfront • SW Hall and SW Moody, The Strand development, South Waterfront • Saturday Market pavilion and Ankeny Plaza COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING • ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • ENGINEERING • PLANNING 6101 SE Johnson Creek Blvd., Milwaukie, Oregon 97206 P) 503-786-7600 / F) 503-774-8236 www.cityofmilwaukie.org Self-Guided Tour Map (Additional examples not shown) Belmont Dairy SE 34th Avenue between SE Belmont & SE Morrison The Belmont Dairy is a successful infill development that complements the materials and scale of the surrounding commercial and residential buildings.
  • Interstate Corridor Community Involvement

    Interstate Corridor Community Involvement

    INTERSTATE CORRIDOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Building community capacity to make informed decisions about light rail and urban renewal in Portland Interstate Corridor Community Involvement TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERSTATE MAX COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT(Continued) INTRODUCTION 1 Community Workshop with john powell 20 Interstate MAX Project History 2 Interstate MAX Bicycle Taskforce 21 MAP: South/North Transit Corridor Study Outreach 3 Portland City Council Hearing on Interstate MAX Conceptual Design Report 22 Shared Spirits Interstate MAX Open House & Community Day 23 COMMUNITY SETTING 4 Polish Community Issues Resolution 23 North/Northeast Portland Historic Setting 4 Interstate MAX Bicycle Taskforce Revisited 24 Social/Economic/Demographics Setting 4 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise/Workforce 25 Brownfields 27 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 6 MAP: Interstate MAX Community Involvement July 1999 – December 2000 30 Overall Public Involvement Structure 6 7 Portland Office of Transportation (PDOT) Interstate Area Personnel INTERSTATE CORRIDOR URBAN RENEWAL 31 Lessons Learned From South/North Project Community Involvement 8 Initial Community Involvement 31 Philosophy of PDOT’s Interstate MAX Community Involvement 8 Interstate Corridor Urban Renewal Advisory Committee (ICURAC) 32 Key Elements Included In PDOT’s Community Involvement 8 Interstate Corridor Urban Renewal Area Priorities Canvass/Survey 33 Standard Community Involvement Practices 9 Racial Impact Study Community Organizing Meetings 34 Interstate Corridor Urban Renewal Community Forums 35 COMMUNITY CAPACITY/WORKING
  • Brand Your Own Block

    Brand Your Own Block

    1350 SW 4TH • PORTLAND OR 97201 BRAND YOUR OWN BLOCK CLASS A CREATIVE FULL BLOCK HQ OPPORTUNITY 163K RSF AVAILABLE FULL BUILDING RENOVATIONS ARE COMPLETE IN the largest block of contiguous space IN THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN PORTLAND Photos courtesy of CoStar Group CLASS A CREATIVE FULL BLOCK HQ OPPORTUNITY 163K RSF AVAILABLE AVAILABILITIES LEVEL 5 42,930 RSF LEVEL 4 43,218 RSF LEVEL 3 24,666 RSF LEVEL 2 18,577 RSF LEVEL 1 19,986 RSF Photos courtesy of CoStar Group Class A creative space READY FOR OCCUPANCY Photos courtesy of CoStar Group Photos courtesy of CoStar Group Largest contiguous block of Full block creative HQ available space in Downtown Sky Lounge Portland opportunity Unmatched branding/naming Potential for new bike hub with 163,000 RSF (Divisible) rights for anchor tenant lockers & showers on lower level Efficient floor plates, up to Abundant growth opportunity Public transit 43,218 RSF through adjacent Wells Fargo & bikers paradise Center 15’ slab to slab ceiling height Ready for Tenant Improvements Ample secure parking HIGHLIGHTS OPEN & VERSATILE SKY LOUNGE Photos courtesy of CoStar Group Photos courtesy of CoStar Group FULLY REMODELED LOBBY Photos courtesy of CoStar Group SURROUNDED BY PORTLAND TECH, creative, and apparel companies 96 WALKER’S PARADISE 100 RIDER’S PARADISE 93 BIKER’S PARADISE 1350 SW 4TH • PORTLAND OR 97201 12 4 SW 1 1 Taylo Starbucks Higgins r St 2 S 2 Starbucks Nel Centro W Salmon 3 S 3 Ristretto Three Degrees t 9 e 4 v 4 Seattle’s Best Lechon A e v A 5 City Coffee 5 McCormick & Schmick’s 2th e v 1 A 5 405
  • DRAFT January 2020

    DRAFT January 2020

    DRAFT January 2020 TriMet: A History of Innovation and Service From our beginning, TriMet has served as a leader and innovator in public transit. We have delivered many “firsts” in our 50-year drive to strengthen the communities and the metropolitan region we serve. 1969 Private transit service in the Portland area faced flagging ridership and losses—threatening cuts in service. Civic and business leaders came together to find a solution and by the end of the year, TriMet was born. The first TriMet buses began service on December 1. 1973 TriMet identifies strategies to increase bus ridership by simplifying and concentrating downtown service on the 5th and 6th Avenue Transit Mall and expanding its bus fleet. 1975 TriMet begins service that eventually becomes TriMet LIFT, well in advance of requirements by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. 1982 A grid of bus lines with some running every 15-minutes or less all day is introduced to Portland’s eastside. This provided for better cross-town direct trips without having to transfer through downtown. It set the stage for future Frequent Service and transit network improvements. 1986 The eastside Banfield Light Rail Project begins service as MAX. 1998 Westside MAX Blue Line introduces low-floor, easy-entry light rail vehicles to North America. 2001 Airport MAX Red Line (the West Coast’s first train to plane) and the modern Portland Streetcar opens. 2004 Interstate MAX Yellow Line opens ahead of schedule with improvements to connecting bus service. TransitTrackerTM - one of the first real-time arrival information systems in the nation - starts.