Below is the approved meeting report for the Bi-State Transportation Committee meeting, held on Thursday, April 27, 2000, from 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. at the Port of Vancouver, 3103 NW Lower River Road, Vancouver, Washington. An agenda for this meeting is also available.

Meeting Report

I. Welcome and Approval of March 23, 2000 Meeting Report

The meeting of the Bi-State Transportation Committee was called to order by Chair Rod Monroe, Metro Councilor, at 7:35 a.m. at the Port of Vancouver, 3103 NW Lower River Road, Vancouver, Washington. Those in attendance follow:

Committee Members
Elsa Coleman, City of Portland (Alternate) Serena Cruz, Multnomah County Commissioner Dave Lohman, Port of Portland Dave Mercier, City of Battle Ground City Manager Arch Miller, Port of Vancouver Commissioner (Alternate) Rod Monroe, Metro Councilor Keith Parker, C-TRAN Executive Director Royce Pollard, City of Vancouver Mayor Craig Pridemore, Clark County Commissioner Bob Stacey, Tri-Met (Alternate) Kay Van Sickel, ODOT Region 1 Manager Don Wagner, WSDOT SW Regional Administrator
Staff
Chris Deffebach, Metro Dean Lookingbill, RTC Diane Workman, RTC
Interested Guests/Parties
Ron Bergman, Clark County Sam Busick, Congressman Brian Baird's Office Evan Dust, Clark County Chuck Green, Parsons Brinckerhoff Michael Haggerty, C-TRAN Paul Haines, Battle Ground Bob Hart, RTC Beckie Lee, Multnomah County Mary Legry, WSDOT John McConnaughey, WSDOT Dennis Mitchell, ODOT Walt Morey, Port of Vancouver Thayer Rorabaugh, City of Vancouver Heidi Rosenberg, Port of Vancouver Tom Ryll, The Columbian Paul Shirley, Port of Portland Gail Spolar, C-TRAN Jon Watson, Port of Vancouver Dave Williams, ODOT

ROYCE POLLARD MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 23, 2000 MEETING REPORT AS WRITTEN, KEITH PARKER SECONDED THE MOTION, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

II. Existing Northbound HOV Lane

Dave Williams, ODOT, recalled that during the trunnion project, an HOV queue bypass was first established. In order to make it more permanent after the trunnion project, they used the shoulder of the roadway for the 2+ 1 HOV lane, from 3 - 6 p.m. A committee was formed to evaluate the performance of the HOV lane. The HOV lane was continued as a demonstration project. In order to evaluate the HOV project the following measures were used: 

1. travel time savings for its users, 
2. move users from SOV to HOV, 
3. HOV lane increased total throughput of persons over the same period of time, 
4. travel time delay for all users, and 
5. traffic operations, moving in and out of HOV lanes.

Chuck Green from Parsons Brinckerhoff said their firm was asked by ODOT to handle the evaluation of the I-5 HOV Pilot Project. Mr. Green highlighted some points of the lane. The information collected is from the 1½ years that it has been open. The results showed drive alone went down and carpool went up. Transit remains about the same, but Mr. Green pointed out that the park and ride lots on the I-5 corridor are at capacity. The HOV lane is moving 2,400 persons per hour and general-purpose lanes are moving 1,700 persons per hour each. The HOV lane is saving over 6-7 minutes per vehicle compared to general-purpose lanes, 2 minutes per mile. Still to be studied is the accident rate. In order to get an accurate accident analysis a 3-year period is needed. The accident rate has increased over the 1½ years but not enough time has passed to verify if the accidents are due to the HOV lane or have just increased overall. Mr. Green highlighted the summary of Public Opinion Surveys and referred to the distributed handout. Surveys showed public support was stable at 70%. He said technically the HOV lane is very successful; compared to other HOV lanes across the country, it is meeting or exceeding the national statistics. Travel timesavings meets the national standard of minimum of 1 minute per mile over general-purpose lane. The compliance rate of the two or more persons per vehicle using the lane is at 90%. Typically there is a 10-15% violation with 85-90% compliance. 

Dave Williams said their evaluation committee recommendation is to continue the HOV lane; however, it is conditioned on being able to get adequate police enforcement to the lane. It was noted that the accident rate is over the 24-hour day and the accidents are mostly minor fender benders. 

III. I-5 HOV Facility Policy Recommendations, Resolution 04-00-01

Dean Lookingbill referred to the Staff Report and Resolution included in the meeting packet. The proposed resolution would 

1. recognize the technical findings of the I-5 HOV Operational Study, 
2. adopt a policy strategy for the implementation of an HOV facility in the I-5 Corridor between Downtown Portland and Vancouver, and 
3. send this recommendation on to JPACT/Metro and RTC for their consideration. 

Chair Monroe emphasized that the Bi-State Transportation Committee is not a final policy decision-making group. It is a policy advisory committee, and their only authority is to advise RTC and JPACT as to what the Bi-State Committee determines the best policy. RTC and JPACT are the final policy-making groups. 

Mr. Lookingbill highlighted the short term and long term I-5 HOV segment recommendations. I-5 from 99th Street to Main Street Interchange short term would have a.m. peak southbound HOV lane provided by redesignating the new general-purpose lane, now under construction, to an HOV lane. This segment would then consist of an HOV lane, two general-purpose lanes and an auxiliary lane. No PM peak northbound HOV lane in this segment is recommended. For this segment in the long term, if new bridge capacity were provided across the Columbia River, the conversion of the southbound auxiliary lane to a general-purpose travel lane should be considered. Additional bridge capacity would also warrant the reconsideration of a northbound HOV lane in Washington. From Main Street to the Interstate Bridge short term a.m. peak southbound HOV should be provided by adding HOV capacity. This segment would then consist of an HOV lane, two general-purpose lanes and the extension of an auxiliary lane from Mill Plain to SR-14. As the HOV lane reaches the bridge, there are two options. One to have general-purpose (GP) traffic merge back into the HOV lane, the other is to have the HOV lane merge into general purpose. In the long term, if new bridge capacity were provided across the river, a northbound HOV lane in Washington should be reconsidered. No HOV lane across the Interstate Bridge is recommended in the short term. In the long term, the I-5 Trade Corridor Study should determine whether or not HOV lane(s) should be a part of a new or expanded bridge. Delta Park in the short term maintains the existing interim HOV lane northbound. In the long term, provide new southbound and permanent northbound capacity for HOV lanes in Oregon through the Delta Park project area. The southbound HOV lane extension through Delta Park is a critical component of a successful bi-state HOV facility. Also to go along with the implementation process would be a public involvement process.

Don Wagner, WSDOT, referred to handouts of the existing southbound I-5 lanes, the selected HOV option for southbound I-5 HOV lanes, and a memorandum of WSDOT Action Plan to Implement HOV In the I-5 Corridor. He said transitioning from HOV is an important issue along with transitioning from part-time or full-time HOV. The report just completed assumed part-time HOV. Mr. Wagner referred to the handout memorandum and the table of time savings. The table showed in 2003, 2 GP lanes plus 1 HOV (2+1 134th to SR 500 and 3+1 SR 500 to Mill Plain) to save 3.7 minutes and for 3 GP lanes plus 1 HOV (3+1 134th to Mill Plain) to save 3.5 minutes. He said most of the travel timesavings would be from Main Street to the bridge. The current work being done from Main Street to 78th would not have a lot of travel timesavings on opening day. What WSDOT has anticipated is that the section from SR-500 down to Mill Plain (where HOV would end) would be 3 general-purpose lanes plus one added HOV lane. There is room to shift lanes over and not take a general-purpose lane. Washington has the same policy that Oregon has and that is to not take a general-purpose lane for HOV. The HOV project from Main Street to Mill Plain is about $1 million worth of work. Areas of pavement for disabled vehicles and enforcement vehicles will also need to be added. Any pavement additions this close to the river require a full environmental process. If WSDOT can process this through their system quick enough, they could actually get a project in the 2001 - 2003 biennium. The work from Main Street to Mill Plain would be completed about the same time the 78th Street to Main Street project is completed. It would be their anticipation to open the entire section from 78th Street to Mill Plain at the same time. On the Main Street to 78th Section, that section is being constructed as 2+ 1 part-time HOV lane. If we decide to go from a part-time HOV to a full-time HOV in a lane, it would be considered taking a lane under the Transportation Commission. He said they still have enough room to move lanes over and re-stripe a fourth lane and make that as the HOV lane and the part-time goes to full-time GP. Federal Highway Administration says that to add a lane in there, it would be necessary to deviate from the design standards on the Interstate. Their scenario was that the design standards were deviated by adding a GP lane. They had a different definition of take a lane than the Commission. So they would not approve deviating from the standards for a GP lane but they would for HOV. He felt the proper thing to do would be to open it up to its ultimate configuration with the understanding that the fourth lane being added in there is an HOV lane. The region would have to work with the Washington Transportation Commission as to modify their definition so that at a later date, if we needed to go to full-time HOV in that lane it would not be a take from GP. The question to be answered is how do you implement HOV in that corridor knowing several projects are underway. Depending on the Transportation Budget, construction dollars in 2001 could build the section of I-5 from 99th Street up to 134th Street. The design for that section is 4 GP lanes. It would be his intent to build that as 3 GP and 1 HOV lane from the beginning. That would put the entire trade corridor to its ultimate configuration of 3 GP lanes and 1 HOV lane upon opening 2004. He said it is their intent to move forward with the resolution under the assumption that the necessary steps would be taken to achieve the Main Street to Mill Plain project in the 2001-2003 budget for WSDOT. If this moves forward, the RTC will have a next step to work with the Transportation Commission to get the rules flexed to allow for part-time HOV. At this time, it is not allowed in the state of Washington. 

Ron Monroe said with the rule of not taking a lane, the time to add HOV is when you are building a new lane. Ultimately, getting HOV north as far as 134th along with additional park and ride is a goal. We have seen the successful results of the current northbound HOV lane. Southbound HOV is looking at 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and ultimately getting money for Delta Park to extend it into Oregon as well. This is the best we can do with the existing bridge. One concern is to not force four or more lanes of traffic onto a three-lane bridge causing a worse bottleneck. It would seem if there is HOV plus 3, you would want one of those lanes to be exiting. A merge lane at the bridge would cause even more back up. Also, to have an HOV lane merge into a GP lane seems to defeat the purpose of the HOV lane. Mr. Wagner said it is their intent to have the same configuration from the SR-14 off ramp to the bridge as is there today. Rod Monroe said it is difficult those of us south of the river to convince the city and others to support additional highway capacity. He believes that it makes sense to add a third lane through Delta Park provided it is for HOV. Actions taken in Washington to support an HOV lane south of the Interstate Bridge will be beneficial for support of the Delta Park Project as well. Don Wagner said the section of roadway that he is building today has been on the books a long time. The 20-year design for that project is up in 2007. We find ourselves with volumes out there today which were the projected volumes for 2007. The ultimate design in their system plan for that section on I-5 is 8 lanes, 4 in each direction which is what we said for the southbound direction under the direction that we are currently going now, 3 GP, I HOV. 

Royce Pollard said since day one we have talked about 2 GP plus 1 HOV and is now hearing something different. He asked Mr. Wagner to explain what is currently there now and what he is anticipating for the segments. Mr. Wagner highlighted the current and future status of the three sections. For 99th St. to 134th Street: currently 2 lanes in each direction and 2 lanes will be added in each direction. As designed today, there would be 4 lanes of traffic, and designed as general-purpose lanes because at the time it was designed, HOV was not carried forward. The Main Street to 99th Street section being built today, would have three full through lanes, at 99th an auxiliary lane is added that drops at 78th and at 78th another auxiliary lane is added which exits at Main Street. There is no current design for the Columbia River to Main Street. They are suggesting that work be done on the structures where there are wide shoulders to carry the fourth lane across. These are the deviations that he would have to ask FHWA for. That would then have three general purpose lanes from 134th Street down through Main Street and Mill Plain and then have the fourth GP lane 99th to 134th to an HOV lane and add in a fourth lane from 99th to Main Street for HOV. Royce Pollard asked what guarantees we had to get the fourth lane to convert to HOV and asked if there would be an HOV lane on the current 78th Street project when it is complete. Don Wagner said as designed, as approved, that project is designed to be a three through lane project. There is room with deviations to add the fourth lane in. It can be opened as three GP lanes, or with approval from the Transportation Commission, it can be opened as three GP lanes and one HOV, or it could be opened as two GP lanes and one HOV lane also. Royce Pollard said that we who believe in this have to jointly go and convince the Commission of this. He said I have thought all along we have talked about two plus one. Mr. Wagner said he thought it could be opened as two plus one and when we got to full time HOV, we could simply add the fourth lane. FHWA did not agree with that. They said this was adding a fourth GP lane and they would not give deviations for that. That led us back to get the deviations for when they open the HOV lane. Mayor Pollard said he was concerned about the message this sends to our partners across the river. We have made some historic changes and we agreed that Delta Park is important to the region and we together will work to fix Delta Park. We need to do our part to get the HOV on our side. Don Wagner said the general policy that is before us today is do we support HOV. If the answer is yes, we have to work on how we are going to implement this on the segments that we are working on. There are issues that need to be addressed in the implementation of HOV. Royce Pollard asked at best case, when we would see an HOV lane understanding all these issues. Mr. Wagner said the earliest any HOV could be seen is on the opening of the 78th to Main Street section. This would be only a one-mile long section of HOV, where there is no delay, at 2+ or 3+. There was further discussion of 2+ versus 3+ lanes, striping of the roadway, and the amount of lanes forced on to the bridge. Craig Pridemore asked if something needed to be done at Bi-State, RTC or JPACT to say that we are supporting HOV. Don Wagner said at this point in time, there has been no official request to the WSDOT to create this HOV lane. It was confirmed that it is time to show support of HOV such as with this resolution. Elsa Coleman said she is hearing two things: 

1. Do we want another lane added, because the only way to get an HOV lane is to add a GP lane and she said there are concerns of adding GP lanes. 
2. To get an HOV lane, there are technical issues and the technical issue is the definition of "take" a lane. 

Don Wagner said they are not adding a GP lane to get an HOV lane; they cannot take a GP lane so they have to add an HOV lane. Elsa Coleman said why not just open it as a full time HOV so there is no question of "take." Mr. Wagner said that is a possibility, but discussions and the study have assumed part-time HOV in Clark County. Mr. Lookingbill used the display map of the selected HOV option to further explain the 3+ versus 2+ HOV lane options being discussed. 

Craig Pridemore said the implementation phase of this is complicated, but he said he sees no reason that the HOV policy resolution cannot proceed as it is showing our support for HOV. The implementation would need to be worked out.

CRAIG PRIDEMORE MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 04-00-01 FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING THE I-5 HOV FACILITY POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. DON WAGNER SECONDED THE MOTION.

Serena Cruz said regardless of how the implementation issues get worked out, we can make statements about policy. This policy is broad, and it does not give direction about adding GP lanes, such as doing whatever possible to not to add GP capacity. Craig Pridemore said he had the same concerns, but these recommendations are not to add general-purpose capacity. The resolution really pushes forward the HOV concept. Don Wagner said this an HOV statement, if you want to talk about system plan and policy, a separate discussion should take place of this. This is simply a statement that we support HOV or not. Bob Stacey said he supported the motion on the resolution. He said this is a statement of support of HOV, but does have concerns of how it is implemented to be addressed. 

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

IV. West Hayden Island Industrial Development

Dave Lohman, Port of Portland, said recognizing the need for port facilities that will meet the projected tripling of exports in the region by 2030 and maintain Portland's advantage as an international shipping and trade center, the Port of Portland has secured the rights to the undeveloped west end of Hayden Island. This is the last area of its size within the Urban Growth Boundary available for marine industrial use. This is a controversial issue with the neighbors on East Hayden Island, the Audubon Society, and the Portland Business Journal all voicing their concerns. Mr. Lohman introduced Paul Shirey, Development Project Manager, to highlight the West Hayden Island Industrial Development in a presentation. The Development Program proposes to develop 550 acres of the site to accommodate the region's marine cargo facility needs for the next 30 years. An Advisory Committee was formed to assist with the development of the Port's zoning proposal to the City of Portland. The Advisory committee is expected to complete its work on the zoning documents by April 2000 and the Port will then submit the zoning package to the City for formal document review and public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council Spring of 2001. The Port will seek Council approval to annex West Hayden Island into the City in the Spring of 2001 as well. Mr. Shirey further highlighted how the Port facility would be developed. Dave Lohman said this raises three fundamental questions as a bi-state region. 

1. Will there be a market for the Hayden Island development when the area could be ready?
2. In light of general and neighborhood specific concerns of growth and quality of life, is it smart for the Portland Vancouver area to encourage this kind of development in the long term? And, 
3. Is there some better place in the region other that West Hayden Island where a cluster of marine terminals could be developed more efficiently? 

Answers are yes, yes, and no. Don Wagner said the Port of Vancouver has a lot of developable land in the area. He asked what that future development in Vancouver in conjunction with the West Hayden Island development would be in total terminal improvements. Dave Lohman said they agreed this would be useful to have. He noted a joint letter included in the handouts from Larry Paulson, Port of Vancouver and Mike Thorne, Port of Portland addressing some of that issue. Dave Mercier said it would be helpful to have information along the way to see the impact to the transportation system.

V. Public Comment

No one in the audience wished to address the Committee.

VI. Future Agenda Items

The next meeting was going to be held on May 18. The May meeting was later canceled. The next meeting will be held June 22, 2000 at Metro at 7:30 a.m.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:02 a.m.