Committee Members Brian Carlstrom
Albert Choi
Jerry Grossnickle
Cecil Jaksha
Karl Kment
Michael Lang
Pam Morneault
StaffDale Robins
Faye Jenkins-Edwards
Michael Ray
Ed Hoyle
Chuck Green
Matt Hastie
Paul Korsmo
Arnold Cogan
Mike Trafflis
VisitorsRose Ann Jaksha
Richard Morneault
Matt Hastie, Cogan Owens Cogan, opened the meeting at approximately 6:00 p.m. Self-introductions were done. Hastie reviewed the agenda with the attendees. An agenda item was added, the NEPA Process, presented by Paul Cosmos, Entranco.
Dale Robins, Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council (RTC), gave a status report on the study. This is a joint study between RTC, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Oregon State Department of Transportation (ODOT). The Parsons Brinkerhoff consulting team is assisting us with this study.
The desired outcome of the study will be an understanding of a new or improved river crossing in the Hood River, White Salmon, and Bingen area. Both short-term and long-term recommendations will be considered, along with an implementation and funding strategy. The study has been broken into 3 tiers. Each tier will refine the level of analysis used and narrow the options considered. We are currently in the first tiers, with all options being considered. By May we hope to narrow the narrow the numerous alternatives down to approximately 2 corridors and 10 alternatives that will proceed into tier 2.
Up to this date the following has happened. In October 2000 we held our first open house and committee meetings. Some of the major issues identified in these meetings included:
- Safety
- Economic
- Transportation
- Alternative Modes
- Tolls/Financing
- Capacity
- Freight
- Historic/Aesthetic Values
- Location
- Environmental
The public and committee members have also offered valuable information on the proposed corridors.
- The activities that have been completed or started since our last meeting include:
- Completion of the community questionnaire (340 responses)
- Completion of the Baseline Condition Report
- Completion of 25 community leader interviews
- Identified criteria for an initial screening of crossing corridors
- Review of facility types
- A meeting was held with federal and state agencies to establish a process for completion of the DEIS.
The next meeting is scheduled for May 2001 and we should be prepared for a more detailed screening of corridor and facility types. This will bring the study to a manageable number of corridors to carry into Tier II.
(this was added to the agenda)
Paul Korsmo, Entranco gave an overview of the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) Process and where the study was at in that process.
- NEPA acts as an “umbrella” for the alternative evaluation and screening
- Elected to begin the process early
- Develop a bi-state agreement among states (Oregon and Washington) federal agencies to solicit lots of input as the study progresses
- Close to issue “Notice of Intent” to the federal register with FHWA
- A formal scoping meeting is scheduled for March 8, 2001 that is part of the required scoping period. It is with the Regulatory Resource Committee and a public meeting in the evening
- Public and Interagency scooping period is 45 days in which to receive written comments
- NEPA process to address DEIS comments
Washington FHWA will be the lead agency for FHWA since this project was instigated on the Washington side.
Question: Who signs off for the NEPA process?
Answer: FHWA representative, which would be from the Washington State Division.
Chuck Green, Parson Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc., lead this part of the agenda.
The Study Evaluation Process was included in the meeting package (see attached). The Preliminary Analysis and Screening Process is to narrow down the alternatives.
- A Purpose and Need statement was developed. The corridors must address the purpose and need statement, such as, transportation or economic development needs
- The corridors must also meet the criteria developed. These criteria will be the initial “fatal flaw” determination for a corridor, there will be other factors also to evaluate in later stages
The criteria that is listed would be considered “fatal flaws”, such as, 1) Impacts on cultural and historic resources; 2) impacts on Native American “in lieu” fishing sites; 3) ”Visual subordinance”; 4) least impact on “section 4(f) resources”; 5) at grade railroad crossing; and, 6) location outside an “urban exempt area”.
Question: Is visual subordinance outside urban exempt area an issue?
Response: Yes, however, outside the urban exempt area should be considered.
Comment: Natural resource impacts – the scenic act requires enhancement of natural, recreational resources. Also need to avoid creating additional urban development outside urban exempt areas.
Chuck Green gave an overview of the corridors and types of facilities recommended for future study.
There were concerns regarding the topography within the corridors.
Comment: Lots of problems with the City Center corridor. Could block wind and ruin windsurfing. Would have a potential impact on the major economy. Would also have negative impact on waterfront plans.
Comment: Agree there are topography would be a problem. Interchange would have a visual impact on hillside (scarring).
Comment: Structure would make it difficult to achieve waterfront vision.
Comment: Second Street serves Waterfront Park development. It would be difficult to maintain.
The waterfront development has been in the planning for 10 years. Just recently consensus with the plan was achieved. This bridge project could cause issues again. Might not meet all criteria. This is the major windsurfing area in the urban area of the Gorge. Windsurfing is 1 of 3 primary types of businesses in area.
Comment: Doesn’t meet 4(f) criteria.
Response: The River itself would not be considered a 4(f) recreational area. It would need to be designated.
Question: Can you add criteria?
Response: Yes.
Comment: Could the economic impacts be incorporated as part of the criteria?
Response: We would need to document elimination of a corridor.
Question: Could eminent domain be used as criteria? Is there a possibility to add criteria?
Response: Yes
Comment: I think it is a good idea to address community concerns. Should add some criteria to address these concerns, economic, recreation, community planning, etc.
Action Item: Add minimum impact to local community as criteria.
Comment: The existing bridge is a drawbridge now. There is a potential impact on raising bridge.
Response: Could be a no build; improvement existing bridge; twin bridge, etc.
Comment: The East Corridor would have to cross Burlington Northern railroad.
Comment: East Corridor would require people to travel east. There is a potential loss of jobs and businesses because people would travel to The Dalles instead of Hood River.
Comment: The south side is outside the urban exempt area.
Chuck Green went over the Preliminary Facility Evaluation. He stressed that at this point nothing has been removed. We cannot predetermine the study outcome because this would not follow the NEPA process. These ratings of “Potential for Further Study” low to high, are recommendations only.
Mike Trafflis, PB, discussed a graph depicting the elevations of the existing and potential crossings so members would have a visual scale of the difference in elevations. Also, mentioned possibility of tunnel options.
Comment: There is a problem with Purpose and Need. Should include reference River transportation.
Action Item: Add river transportation language.
Comment: Windsurfing could be impacted on the East Corridor.
Comment: The East Corridor is in the Reese’s Mill area.
Comment: The East A Corridor – the City of Bingen is doing a feasibility study. East B Corridor would need to be an overcrossing over railroad.
Comment: The West Corridor would have impact on Hood River windsurfing. The East Corridor would have impact on Bingen Point area.
- There will be a public open house March 8, 2001, 5-8 PM, at Fidel’s at the Gorge restaurant in Bingen. This will be the public scooping meeting as required by NEPA
- The Port will allow meeting notices to be posted on the tollbooth on the bridge
- Community newsletter will be going out soon. Jennifer, City of Hood River, will be contact for Hood River area. Newsletter will be on the web and available in public buildings, city hall, county offices, library, etc.
- Port will link their website to the SR 35 website.
- Public outreach – a speakers bureau will be formed. If anyone on the committee is interested in being available for public presentations to organizations in the area they are encouraged to sign up. Training will be provided. The Management Team is also available for presentations.
- Contact community radio station – KBOO.
If there are any other comments you can email or send a letter to Dale Robins, RTC.
The next meeting is tentatively scheduled for May 3rd or 10th from 6:00 to 8:30 at the Expo Center in Hood River.
The Departments of Transportation’s Region Administrators will be meeting on May 1. They will be recommending whether to proceed to the next tier of the study based.
E-mail or phone:
Dale Robins
Regional Transportation Council
1351 Officers Row, Vancouver WA 98661
Tel: 360-397-6067
Fax: 360-696-1847
       
|