Below are the minutes for the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council Board of Directors Meeting, held on Tuesday, May 3, 2005, at 4:30 p.m. at the Clark County Public Service Center, 1300 Franklin Street, Vancouver, Washington. The agenda for this meeting is also available.
I. Call to Order and Roll Call of Members
The Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council Board of Directors Meeting was called to order by Chair Arch Miller on Tuesday, May 3, 2005, at 4:30 p.m. at the Clark County Public Service Center Sixth Floor Training Room, Vancouver, Washington. Attendance follows.
Board Members Present Marc Boldt, Clark County Commissioner
Rex Burkholder, Metro Councilor
Bill Ganley, Battle Ground Council Member
Matthew Garrett, ODOT Region One Manager
Lynne Griffith, C-TRAN Exec. Director/CEO
Pat McDonnell, Vancouver City Manager
Arch Miller, Port of Vancouver Commissioner
Betty Sue Morris, Clark County Commissioner
Paul Pearce, Skamania County Commissioner
Royce Pollard, Vancouver Mayor
Steve Stuart, Clark County commissioner
Don Wagner, WSDOT Regional Administrator
Don Benton, Senator 17th District
Joe Zarelli, Senator18th District
Richard Curtis, Representative 18th DistrictBoard Members Absent Brian Prigel, Bingen Mayor
Camas/Washougal Representative
Jim Honeyford, Senator 15th District:
Bruce Chandler, Representative 15th District:
Dan Newhouse, Representative 15th District
Jim Dunn, Representative 17th District
Deb Wallace, Representative 17th District
Ed Orcutt, Representative 18th District
Craig Pridemore, Senator 49th District
Bill Fromhold, Representative 49th District
Jim Moeller, Representative 49th District
Guests PresentEd Barnes, WA Transportation Commissioner
Monte Brachmann, City of Camas
Peter Capell, Clark County
Rob Charles, City of Battle Ground
Justin Clary, City of Ridgefield
Paul Edgar, Citizen
Mark Garrity, WSDOT
Bart Gernhart, WSDOT
Brent Grening, Port of Ridgefield
Rich Gunderson, Port of C/W Commissioner
Chad Hancock, WSDOT
Michael Kepcha, Citizen
Mindi Linquist, Senator Patty Murray’s Office
Dick Malin, Citizen
Erin Middlewood, The Columbian
Tom Mielke, Citizen
Sharon Nasset, Citizen
Philip A. Parker, Labor Round Table
Scott Patterson, C-TRAN
Larry Paulson, Port of Vancouver
Ed Pickering, C-TRAN
Thayer Rorabaugh, City of Vancouver
Scott Sawyer, City of Washougal
Bill Stewart, The Oregonian
Mark Turpel, Metro
Terri Tweedell, Battle Ground Chamber
Sheldon Tyler, Port of Camas/Washougal
Sharon Wylie, Clark County
Staff PresentLynda David, Senior Transportation Planner
Bob Hart, Transportation Section Supervisor
Dean Lookingbill, Transportation Director
Dale Robins, Senior Transportation Planner
Diane Workman, Administrative/Staff AssistantChair Miller thanked the legislators for attending.
II. Approval of April 5, 2005, Minutes
LYNNE GRIFFITH MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 5, 2005, MEETING MINUTES. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED AND UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
III. Citizen Communications
Paul Edgar said years ago he did detailed analysis of the HOV lane. He said he researched the HOV lane’s compliance standards based upon what the federal government wants. The federal guidelines for establishing an HOV lane on an interstate highway like I-5 have not been met. He said of the eight criteria, he felt there has not been success in the eyes of the public. He said if the HOV lane is not adequate for the I-5 Bridge because it reduces the amount of total throughput of vehicles on the bridge, how could it be adequate to get more vehicles in doing the same job? He said he has done many reports with no response from the research he has done. Mr. Edgar said a citizen that he works with was active in the I-5 Task Force and decided to back away from this activity because he felt they did not care about freight mobility. Mr. Edgar said his concern is that this organization will continue to sport with the Columbia River Crossing or will it look at real alternatives that do provide freight mobility and the opportunity to create jobs. He said it will take $2 billion to solve I-5 in Portland, and that money is not there. He said I-5 as a freight mobility corridor is not something that will cut it. He said that is known and wonders why we are going down the path with the Columbia River Crossing money; we’re loosing an opportunity.
Chair Miller thanked Mr. Edgar. He said that RTC may not have responded to every communications that have been sent, but there have been several responses. Mr. Edgar had stated that no response had been given, but in fact there have been some responses.
Don Wagner said Mr. Edgar is correct in that the HOV lane does not move more vehicles than a general-purpose lane. That is not the purpose of the HOV lane, per the October 2004 report it carried more people than the general-purpose lane over the two-hour morning peak period.
Tom Mielke said the HOV lane started as a one-year project, then a two-year project, and on to a four-year project. He said in all these years, he felt there have been pollution caused, economic impacts, and delay to commuters. He said they did counts and inventory of how full the buses were. He said he hated to think of all the dollars that have been spent to fix the I-5 Bridge problem, and the problem lies on the other side. Even with the bottleneck at Delta Park removed, there is still only so much room in that area. He would like to see another corridor go across. He asked the RTC Board to reject the HOV lane because it has failed to move more cars and more people.
Chair Miller said Oregon is working to fix the Delta Park problem. It is in process, and it takes time.
Sharon Nasset from north Portland asked in regard to HOV lanes, if it was admirable to have a lot more people traveling in the lane and have a lot more pollution and car traffic. She said after eight years of being temporary, it has raised the pollution because it has caused people who are not using the HOV lane of traffic to move as many vehicles as the other lanes of traffic. So people sit and burn off fuel and pollute the area more than the HOV takes away. Ms. Nasset said there used to be HOV into town, but they removed the HOV as soon as the light rail went through, because it was not doing what it was supposed to do. She said HOV doesn’t work for now, maybe in the future. She said a new bridge should have either light rail or some sort of transit service, but we need 24-hour service. She felt it was wrong to have HOV lanes.
IV. Consent Agenda
- May Claims
STEVE STUART MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA MAY CLAIMS. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY LYNNE GRIFFITH AND UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Don Benton asked how many employees were on the payroll for RTC, and Mr. Lookingbill said 9.5 employees. Mr. Benton asked if payroll was paid twice a month at about $35,000. Lookingbill agreed that total payroll and benefits for all RTC employees was about $70,000 a month.
Chair Miller introduced Larry Paulson, Executive Director for the Port of Vancouver. The Port of Vancouver is seeking $8 million in 2006 Federal Appropriations Request for the NW 26th Avenue and Port of Vancouver Rail Access. Mr. Paulson said they had an opportunity presented to them to ask for an additional appropriation for $8 million aimed at two parts of the Columbia Gateway project. One is for a road; working with the City of Vancouver, and the other is for rail access to the north. As they look to the future and future growth, getting to and from the Port by rail and by road, particularly truck traffic is going to be more and more challenging. Particularly considering rail congestion at the Vancouver line, where trains block mainline rail lines north and south and east and west mainlines. The long-term rail improvement is a means to deal with congestion in the future as they are in the process of doubling the size of the Port. For road, they feel it will buy additional access to and from the Port around Fruit Valley. He said their partner is the City of Vancouver. The type of funds requested is STP (Surface Transportation Program). This opportunity came to them quickly, in the last week, and they have notified their partners.
Mr. Lookingbill said this project has been discussed at the RTC Board in the past, and it is a project that is on the Regional Transportation System. This project has received $600,000 in regionally allocated STP and has received a similar request for $1 million from the 2005 federal appropriation process. This grant request will add funding to the project and will move the project further into the EIS and a design process. Mr. Paulson said his understanding is that although it is a 2006 request, they have three years in which to use the $8 million. Mr. Lookingbill reminded the RTC Board that they had already identified the projects that would go in the six-year reauthorization request and 2006 annual appropriation request; this was not on the list. Given the RTC Board’s consent, the Port’s project would be added to the list and would recognize the Port’s circumstances. There was no objection or comment. Copies of a brochure for the Vancouver Rail Project were distributed.
V. Report: East County Transportation Issues
Dean Lookingbill noted Port of Camas Washougal Commissioner Rich Gunderson was in attendance today. Mr. Lookingbill then referred to the memorandum included in the meeting packet. Mr. Lookingbill noted the amount of growth in population in the Camas and Washougal areas as compared to total Clark County population. He noted that long-term transportation ideas include a discussion of some sort of linkage from Camas to Battle Ground to the north. A key interest for Washougal is their interest in their downtown redevelopment along with SR-14 improvements.
Mr. Lookingbill introduced the presenters: Monte Brachmann, Camas Public Works Director; Scott Sawyer, Washougal Public Works Director; and Sheldon Tyler, Port of Camas/Washougal Executive Director. Mr. Lookingbill also introduced Bart Gernhart, WSDOT to present the update on the SR-14 Corridor Study.
Bart Gernhart said the SR-14 project is a widening project including an interchange. He used a large aerial display map to explain the project. Mr. Gernhart said SR-14 ends the four lanes at 6th Avenue and goes to two lanes crossing the two slews, with intersections at SR-500, 2nd, 6th, 15th, 32nd, and 45th Streets. There is a safety problem in the corridor with an average of 50 accidents per year and one fatality per year. They have received $40 million to move forward to try and address the issues. The project is to widen the freeway up to SR-500 and put an interchange or partial interchange at SR-500. They are in the process of defining how much can be done for the $4 million. Mr. Gernhart said over the past year, they have had some public meetings, but without funding for the project had not been able to proceed. The goals are to improve safety, reduce congestion, and improve economic development. They want to make every dollar count. He said the corridor looks similar to SR-500 a number of years ago.
Mr. Gernhart said the existing piers for a future bridge are not up to standards and don’t meet seismic codes, or truck loads. The piers were built in the 60s, and it doesn’t look like they will be able to use them. The idea is to expand to four lanes as far as they can. He said they don’t want to do what was done on SR-500 nearly two decades ago. He said on SR-500, WSDOT built four lanes in the 80s, and they have now had to come back and rebuilt interchanges and overpasses because of the high accident problem occurring at the intersections. The earlier situation on SR-500 is similar to issues they are facing today on SR-14. Each intersection on SR-14 is a high accident location. He said they do not want to build a four-lane facility with at grade intersections and have to come back in 10 to 15 years and rebuild major sections like was done at Andresen and 112th on SR-500. Mr. Gernhart said they don’t think they have enough money to build four lanes out to 15th or 6th Streets. They may have to end the four lanes and return to the current configuration two-lane facility at 6th Street. He said they would close off 2nd and 6th Streets and have a frontage road connect at SR-500/Union. That eliminates three intersections and the associated high potential for accidents. It also allows folks living in Washougal headed westbound to get on SR-14 at 15th Street and have nonstop travel to both Interstates and Vancouver. Mr. Gernhart said they would build as much as they can with the $40 million. They will be working with Clark County, Camas, Washougal, Port of Camas/Washougal, citizens, and businesses. He said there are a couple of interim improvements that will get underway this year that have been requested by both cities and the Port. At 32nd Street changes are being made to preclude certain turn movements. At 45th a turn lane was added along with lighting. Both of these intersections have recently experienced fatal accidents. As the SR-14 project moves forward, WSDOT will make other improvements to 15th. Mr. Gernhart said WSDOT would continue to work with RTC, Camas, Washougal, the Port, and Clark County and continue their public involvement efforts. Because of the magnitude of the project, they will need to hire an environmental consultant and a design consultant. He said they have commitments to break ground in 2009 and have it open to traffic in 2010.
Rex Burkholder asked how this impacted the port access and the recreational access. Mr. Gernhart said 15th, 27th,and 32nd are the streets with water access. There is a crosswalk at 15th and 27th goes under the freeway. With the new configuration, there should be less traffic at 32nd. The long-term vision is to have an interchange at 15th and 32nd.
Senator Zarelli said he needed to better understand the design process and why it takes five years to get it done. He asked for a breakdown of the process. He said the $40 million would go further today than it will in five years. Mr. Gernhart said he would be glad to come back with a timeline. He said Tom Mielke participated in a number of meetings on the I-5 and 219th Street Interchange project and saw how they go about communicating with the public, getting input, changing the design as they go. He said if they had purchased right-of-way on that project when asked to two years ago, it would have been the wrong property. Mr. Gernhart offered to come back with the chronology of the rules and laws and guidelines that they have to follow in order to go forward with this project. NEPA is a federal law. Because of the water, they have to do a biological assessment for fish. They have to go through formal consultations with Fish and Wildlife, which can take over a year. He said they could not purchase right-of-way with federal money until all that process is complete. Arch Miller said he has been a Commissioner with the Port for 16 years, and they were working on the channel deepening before that, and they are still working on the channel deepening.
Representative Curtis asked what they as legislators could do as far as changing laws to assist in streamlining the process so goals could be achieved in a reasonable fashion. He asked to have suggestions of what could be done. Mr. Gernhart said that Senator Swecker is Chair of a committee who is working streamlining the environmental regulations. Mr. Gernhart said one of his projects is involved in this, which is called self-permitting. This allows WSDOT to permit themselves. The problem is that even though they write the permit, there are still other agencies at various levels that need to approve it. Mr. Gernhart thanked Representative Curtis, and said he would give it serious thought. Mr. Gernhart said that because the SR-14 project is state funding, and not federal funding, they are able do more things concurrently. The Port and Camas and Washougal have asked for federal earmark money. If that money is used, it will require federal laws.
There was a question of the $40 million coming in over a few years. Mr. Gernhart said they have design money up front, then right-of-way money, and construction money in 2009. Mr. Gernhart said that the money is not the issue.
Mark Boldt asked if there were right-of-way issues at Lady Island. Mr. Gernhart said he believed the right-of-way in the SR-14 corridor was purchased except for the locations of the frontage roads. Mr. Boldt asked why they could not start with the bridges. Mr. Gernhart said it is federal law that they must go through the environmental process first. The piers that are there do not meet code, and it is more costly to try to retrofit than to replace.
Chair Miller asked that Dean and Bart work together to bring back to the Board a timeline for the project along with any suggestions for streamlining the process.
Mr. Lookingbill invited Camas, Washougal, and the Port of Camas-Washougal to present their issues.
Scott Sawyer, Washougal Public Works Director, said between 1990 and 2004, the City of Washougal saw about 126% growth. Between last year and this year, they have had a large amount of growth and development. He said the challenge with growth is the travel demand that occurs on the transportation systems. He said the average weekday traffic on SR-14 has increased 100%, and 32nd Street has increased by 163%. This is huge growth on their internal streets. Fifteen years ago, the streets handled a city of 4,000 people, now they are over 10,000. Downtown renovation is one of Washougal’s key development goals, which would include retail commercial development and professional offices. Washougal hopes to benefit from its location as one of the gateways to the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area and attract tourists passing through on SR-14.
Washougal has three main access points off SR-14, 15th, 32nd, and 45th Streets. These continue to be challenges, and Washougal is very supportive of the improvements to SR-14 and looks forward to the continuation of the development through Washougal. E Street/Evergreen Way is the east-west facility serving Washougal. This is a continuation of the NE 6th/NE 3rd Avenue route from Camas. Washougal envisions improvements to this street to make it a multi-lane boulevard with pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Residential areas have been developing to the northeast and northwest of the city center, and this development will continue into the future. The new developments will require new north-south arterials and improved north-south capacity on streets such as 17th and 32nd Streets as well as improved access to and from SR-14. Mr. Sawyer said the very busy at-grade railroad crossing is a major problem that needs to be addressed.
Senator Zarelli asked with all of the growth, how many new households they expect this year. Mr. Sawyer said they currently have 1600 lots in different phases. Last year they had 400, and they are now just over 200, so they may get 500 this year. Betty Sue Morris asked how many times the freight trains pass a day. Trains pass about 40 times a day, and there is discussion of a proposed second set of tracks.
Sheldon Tyler, Executive Director of the Port of Camas Washougal, said that it is an issue with 40 trains a day and the trains getting longer. In the Port’s Industrial Park this causes problems and closes down three streets. Mr. Tyler said the Cottonwood Beach Captain William Clark Park is a regional project between Clark County, Camas, Washougal, and the Port. The park should be substantially completed this summer. They anticipate this bringing a lot to the area, particularly this year and next as we celebrate the Lewis and Clark celebration. The other large project that the Port is working on is a $6 million boat launch ramp that they received state funding for to match with Port funds. He said they do not currently have the $6 million match, but hope to possibly make a regional effort. The Parker House restaurant project is underway, hopefully opening this summer. Mr. Tyler said the Port is looking at possible changes to the marina area as the launch ramp comes into play. The industrial park figures listed in the memorandum were not correct. Mr. Tyler said they have about 900 employees in the industrial park and 125 acres to develop. At about 5 employees per acre, it would bring about 600 additional employees to the area. The City of Washougal is taking the lead on plans for a solid waste and recycling transfer station off Grant Street in the Port’s industrial area. Camas will participate in that as well. He said they are currently in negotiations with Waste Connections to do a transfer station.
Marc Boldt asked if the transfer station would accept small trucks/personal vehicles. Mr. Tyler said he understands that they would be accepted two days a week, Fridays and Saturdays.
Monte Brachmann, Public Works Director for the City of Camas, said they currently have 1,700 building lots in different stages. There is a pending annexation north of town that has 400-600 building lots. The City of Camas is working with Washougal and Clark County on a number of items including projects around Crown Road making it a more significant connector for Camas. SR-500 is currently a two-lane facility that is heavily used for a north/south corridor. Camas has many features that make it a challenge including Lacamas Lake, Prune Hill, and the Columbia River. East West arterials that connect Camas with the Vancouver Urban Growth Area will become more significant as retail magnets such as the new Home Depot at the Columbia Tech Center attracts trips from the Camas area on routes other than SR-14 as well as the new Evergreen School District High School off 192nd Avenue/SE 1st Street. Mr. Brachmann said Lake Road is currently under construction and in just over a month, all four lanes will be open through SE 1st. He highlighted other street construction that is taking place. Mr. Brachmann thanked the legislators for the money to do the widening project on SR-14, noting that it will greatly assist in the safety of the corridor.
Senator Zarelli asked when 192nd would be connected to SR-14 for use. That intersection should be ready for use in August.
VI. Washington State Legislature: New Revenue Package and Transportation Legislation
Dean Lookingbill distributed a memorandum along with a series of attachments that highlight some of the transportation bills. Mr. Lookingbill said the session has ended with an $8.5 billion transportation revenue package. For Clark, Skamania, and Klickitat Counties he displayed the 2003 Nickel and 2005 Partnership Projects and their funding distributions. Mr. Lookingbill highlighted key 2005 transportation legislation including: SSB 5177 Transportation Benefit Districts, ESB 5513 Restructuring Certain Transportation Agencies, SHB 2124 Increasing State Participation in Public Transportation Service Planning, SHB 1541 Public Private Partnerships, and SSB 5139 Modifying Highway and Bridge Tolling Authority. Information was included in the memorandum.
Senator Zarelli said there were two other pieces to the legislation not mentioned. One item addressed the Battle Ground widening project and how to deal with the issue of right-of-way. Also, in SHB 2124, there is specific language regarding latecomer fees, which will be valuable for at least one project in the county to allow us a public private partnership.
Steve Stuart asked regarding the latecomer fees, if that specifically authorizes them to go into public-private partnerships. Senator Zarelli said it authorizes WSDOT to enter into and manage those partnerships.
Betty Sue Morris thanked the legislators for the revenue package and transportation legislation. She questioned the meaning of a sentence in SSB 5177 the Transportation Benefit Districts. The statement is: “The TBD area must include the entire area within each participating jurisdiction.” She asked if that was the whole county or just the unincorporated areas. Don Benton said the jurisdiction for the TBD would be the lines of the jurisdiction that opts to implement. So, if the City were to embark on a TBD, it would occur within the lines of the city. If the County were to embark, it would be within the lines of the county. Betty Sue Morris asked if the County would decide, that would include everyone. Senator Benton said it could. The TBDs may fund projects that are of statewide or regional significance. A TBD may spend up to 40 percent of its generated revenue on local street, road, and highway improvements.
Richard Curtis said there were specific reasons for each of the bills that passed. He said on ESB 5513, the Restructuring Certain Transportation Agencies, which allows the Governor to appoint the Secretary of Transportation. This is good and will allow them to be accountable. Representative Curtis said there is also a Salmon Creek project that was not mentioned that received funding out of the old Nickel package excess funds. That will allow closure on that project which is important and much needed. He also said that he felt the public-private partnership would work out well in the 18th District.
Arch Miller asked if there was a provision in the $50 million for the Columbia River Crossing that said that every dollar from Washington would be matched by Oregon. Don Benton said there was not talk of a matching language. He said it certainly was a consensus that it should be, but no language as such.
Betty Sue Morris thanked the legislators for all the work that was done on the transportation package. She said Clark County is very grateful to them.
To clarify the magnitude of these dollar amounts; Don Wagner said that in this next biennium, WSDOT SW Region construction budget would increase by 50 percent over what would normally be done. He said the following biennium, it about doubles what would normally be done, and the biennium after that, it goes to 150 percent of the normally done construction budget. He said it is huge. In the seven county SW region, it is a little over a half a billion dollars of new improvements primarily along the I-5 corridor. Mr. Wagner said 2007 – 2009 is a huge construction cycle for WSDOT. It was questioned that the jobs would be provided for local people. Mr. Wagner said that they are currently looking at capacity of not only local but within the state and bordering states for some of the materials that they will need for the construction projects. Some projects have a lot of steel and some have a lot of aggregate, and they are looking to see if that kind of material will be available for them.
Arch Miller asked Don Wagner in looking at the big picture, that if the Nickel tax, which is all new construction, the 9.5 cents, which is new construction, and the gasoline tax that is left were all taken out, how much is left? Mr. Wagner said 23 cents. Mr. Miller said that previously he had heard that 23 cents is just enough to do maintenance with no money left over for additional construction. Mr. Wagner said maintenance also includes preservation. It is maintaining and preserving the existing system. It is the two most recent packages that have allowed them to increase their capacity. Mr. Miller asked if the projects that are funded by the Nickel package and the 9.5 cents package are the only new construction. Mr. Wagner said generally, yes, those two packages are paying for the increase in the capacities.
Don Benton said the 23 cents in the current gas tax does cover some new construction, but a lot of that is tied up in bonding. As those bonds are paid off, as the years go by, that money is then freed up. Income is being used for preservation and maintenance, but it is being used to retire bond debt. Once the bonds are retired, that money then becomes available for new construction again.
Bill Ganley added that the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) also received money.
VII. I-5 High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Pilot Project
Dean Lookingbill referred to the memorandum included in the meeting packet with an attachment of a memo to the Bi-State Coordination Committee. Bob Hart said the Bi-State Coordination Committee was briefed in March about the October 2004 findings and on the traffic analysis for the Delta Park/Lombard Environmental Assessment. At that meeting, the Bi-State Committee recommended the continuation of the Vancouver Pilot project. This recommendation also included the extension of the southbound HOV lane into Oregon to be implemented as a part of the Delta Park widening project.
Mr. Hart said the RTC Board has had update presentations on the HOV in December 2004, January 2005, and March 2005. Also in March 2005, the Bi-State Committee was briefed and made recommendations regarding HOV in the corridor. Mr. Hart said the history of the Vancouver HOV began with a Clark County Regional HOV System Study in December 1998, which recommended HOV goals and policies for the region, and also recommended that I-5 was the best candidate for HOV. The I-5 HOV Operational Study in April 2000 developed a series of alternatives for HOV in the corridor, and recommended what is there now, actually a two-phased bi-state HOV facility. Phase one is the pilot project that is now in place, and phase two is to extend it into Oregon in conjunction with the Delta Park Project. The RTC Board, JPACT, and the Washington Transportation Commission all took action by September 2000. The lane opened in October 2001. Six HOV evaluation reports have been completed since that time (October 2001 to October 2004).
The Delta Park/Lombard project environmental assessment process has been underway to widen from two to three lanes. That analysis includes examination of a series of alternatives and options. The analysis includes examination of operating the third lane as an HOV lane. The EA process will be complete and a preferred option selected in late summer/early fall. Project financing is expected through Federal Reauthorization and Oregon state funding.
Mr. Hart said the recommendation of the Bi-State Coordination Committee includes two parts. The first is on the existing Washington HOV lane to recommend to the WSDOT to continue the pilot project with direction to work collaboratively with Oregon to examine prospects and priorities to operate the lane in the future as a managed lane. The second part refers to the proposed Oregon HOV lane to recommend to JPACT and ODOT support of operating an HOV lane as part of Delta Park project with direction to work collaboratively with Washington to examine prospects and priorities to operate the lane in the future as a managed lane. The RTC Board is being asked for concurrence with the Bi-State Committee’s recommendations.
Don Benton asked about the meaning of a managed lane. Mr. Lookingbill noted that in the Bi-State memorandum on page 7, information on a managed lane was listed. Bob Hart explained that especially in the I-5 corridor, both the current and the existing travel forecast show advantages to the managed lane. A managed lane offers other user groups in the lane to increase the vehicle use of the lane. An example is in Washington, D.C., they allow hybrid vehicles to use the lane at the same time or other areas offer use to small trucks. Another option is a “buy in”. Single occupant vehicles are allowed to use the lane for a price. A managed lane is a lane that is operated to maximize the effectiveness of the freeway corridor. Senator Benton said he wanted the managed lane clarified since it was part of the recommendation. Chair Miller said no decisions are being made today. This is a recommendation to just examine prospects and priorities to operate the lane in the future as a managed lane.
Joe Zarelli asked ODOT when construction of the third lane would take place at Delta Park, and if they were thinking seriously of making the third lane an HOV lane. Matt Garrett said the glide path has construction of the third lane southbound at Delta Park to take place in 2008. Looking at the HOV options are part of the Environment Assessment process and funding has been secured for the construction. Senator Zarelli asked if HOV had been determined for the lane. Mr. Garrett said that has not yet been determined. They are still looking at all options. He said the last thing that they want to do is put in something that compromises the travel in the corridor. He said it is not appropriate to compromise the general-purpose lane to a point that it shuts down or compromises the ability of freight to negotiate within the corridor. All those policy options are being applied to look at the options and managed lanes.
Betty Sue Morris asked for clarification of a hybrid vehicle using the lane. She asked if a single occupant hybrid could use the lane, but if it were not a hybrid, it would have to pay. Mr. Hart said that is not necessarily true. These are just examples of what other areas have done for managed lanes.
Richard Curtis asked if it was conceivable that the people who are working in Oregon and paying taxes there could be given a preference in an HOV lane to allow them to go back and forth more readily. Could those users be given a priority? Don Wagner said yes. It could be included as a group. Managed lanes simply say you limit who can and cannot use the lane. It is open to whatever the law allows. It would be up to the legislature to make changes that would enable us to do something different than we do today.
Royce Pollard said that Matt Garrett had said Delta Park had a 2008 construction, he asked when the decision would be made regarding if the additional lane would be HOV. Matt Garrett said they would have the answer when the Environmental Assessment is complete, possibly by the end of the year.
Marc Boldt asked if the bridge would have HOV. Mr. Hart said for this process, the concept does not include replacement of the bridge, so it would not have HOV. The discussions of a new Columbia River Crossing would include HOV analyzed as an option along with other options. Mr. Boldt asked if the decision is to remove the HOV today, could we not come back and put it on the bridge? Mr. Hart said the discussion today is with the current configuration of the bridge, which would not have HOV. The new crossing would still allow the option.
Don Benton said he strongly disagreed with this recommendation. He said he read over the HOV Report #6, and was shocked the recommendation could be made by the Bi-State Committee.
SENATOR DON BENTON MOVED THAT RTC REQUEST WSDOT TO IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUE THE SOUTHBOUND I-5 HOV LANE PILOT PROJECT. CLARK COUNTY COMMISSIONER MARC BOLDT SECONDED THE MOTION.
It was clarified that Senator Benton as an ex officio member could make a motion but could not vote.
To support the motion, Senator Benton referenced the Vancouver HOV Lane Pilot Project Evaluation Report #6. He said when the HOV project was adopted, there were eight criteria goals set forth for the pilot project. The project was evaluated six times. Senator Benton stated the report said six of the eight goals had been met, and he felt the project had never met the criteria. He listed each of the eight goals and the reason he felt the goal had not been met as stated. Senator Benton said he conducted a survey in January 2005, and he distributed copies of the results of the survey. The survey was asked of 2000 people with the question being “do you believe that the HOV lane on I-5 in Vancouver has been effective in relieving traffic congestion?” His results showed 17% said yes and 45% said no and 37% didn’t know. Senator Benton said he felt that data could be used to answer goal 8 of the public opinion. He felt of the eight criteria set up four years ago for the pilot project, seven were failing and two were unknown. Senator Benton said he did not think that the HOV lane should be allowed to continue, and it should be revisited if we felt that was necessary when the construction is complete and the bottleneck is opened up.
Royce Pollard said he understands that Senator Benton does not approve of the project. Mayor Pollard said he was one of the members of the Bi-State Committee that made the recommendation to continue the project. He said from his point of view, the future of bi-state relations is somewhat on the table today. He said we have made a significant investment in this HOV lane. That we knew at the beginning that it would not be overwhelmingly successful, but we had hoped it would at least point the way. We have a commitment on the Oregon side to do Delta Park. He said if a decision of HOV or not at Delta Park is at the end of this year, it seems a disservice of us to not at least consider extending this pilot project until that decision is made. If the Delta Park decision is to not do HOV, he said he would be the first to ask why we are doing it. He offered that if we cut it now, it would probably create a significant wedge in what we often think are good or practical relationships in a metropolitan area in which we all, Clark County, want to be players. Mayor Pollard said he would err on the side of caution. He did not support Senator Benton’s motion.
Senator Benton said he is more concerned with the fragile relationship we have with our voters and our constituents whether or not they will support transportation benefit districts, and other projects that we want them to support in our community. With regard to continuing this pilot project with call for patience as Mayor Pollard had said, he said he felt that we have been extremely patient for four years. Senator Benton said that even if they have HOV at Delta Park, he questioned the benefit to our citizens. He said he was not sure if fixing a bottleneck problem is by restricting the use of the new capacity lane. He said that is what was done here in Vancouver, and it increased travel times. He did not think that was an incentive for us.
Joe Zarelli said he was in favor of the motion. He said he took a bold step this year in supporting transportation. He said in dealing with that, he chose to get involved with what Washington taxpayers are concerned with, the inefficiency of WSDOT. They implemented a strong performance audit bill. Now, we will have outside audits of the projects and see how the money is spent. He said this is one of those examples. He said as Senator Benton had said, it wasn’t the hybrid users that paid to build the road, and it will not be hybrid users that build the bridge. They are less of a contributor to our highway system than everyone else who is driving. Senator Zarelli said he would be more concerned about continuing the HOV into Portland. He said once we get to Delta Park, it will still go from three back to two lanes, and that is the way it stays through Portland. He said this is a huge problem, and for ODOT to get the third lane, it will be the same scenario we have here. It will not accomplish a thing. He felt the HOV lane needs to be dropped, and we need to start working more on the credibility with the taxpayers that are ultimately going to build that bridge, otherwise we will work on discrediting as we move to the future. He would ask ODOT to not even consider the idea of punishing the taxpayers that are contributing greatly to the state of Oregon with their state income tax. He asked those who have the value of a vote to vote for this change.
Steve Stuart thanked Mayor Pollard for his comments and support of the HOV lane. He said he fully supports a functional HOV lane across the river and into Portland as a way to move more people and fewer vehicles, especially in an urban area like he represents. He said the problem is that this is not a functional HOV lane. With the existing bridge structure that we have, we are not going to see across the river in a contiguous fashion. It will be years before we see the Delta Park bottleneck fixed, and even once it is fixed, there is at least one more chokepoint down the road. He said we are a long way from being able to have a continuous HOV lane that moves more people and fewer vehicles in to Portland from our side of the river. He said he is absolutely committed to bi-state relations and making sure that we are working across the river and working with the region to make sure that we are actually doing the work that we have to do to make sure that our economy keeps prospering. He said at this time, he can’t support continuing the experiment, and he would support Senator Benton’s motion.
Lynne Griffith asked Matt Garrett if he had said if the data shows on the Oregon side that an HOV lane causes detriment to the general-purpose lanes that Oregon would not consider an HOV lane. Matt Garrett said what they would consider is various policy options, and the last thing they would want to do is compromise the general-purpose lane and do a disservice to those who use that lane. That does a disservice to the folks moving freight and commerce.
Lynne Griffith asked Don Wagner if there had ever been discussions at WSDOT to continue an HOV lane to the north. Don Wagner said at this time, there is no conversation about continuing it to the north. He said we don’t have congestion to the north in the a.m. or p.m. peak that would warrant any type of action like that.
Betty Sue Morris said that Mr. Ganley needed to leave in about four minutes, so she called for the question. Chair Miller asked Senator Benton to repeat his motion.
DON BENTON MOVED THAT RTC REQUEST WSDOT TO IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUE THE SOUTHBOUND I-5 HOV LANE PILOT PROJECT. MARC BOLDT SECONDED THE MOTION.
Don Wagner said for clarification, he would abstain from the vote, as this is a recommendation to his Commission and his Department.
Chair Miller said a Yes vote is in support of Senator Benton’s motion to recommend to WSDOT to discontinue the HOV pilot project. Senator Benton asked if the votes were recorded by individual and not number. A roll call vote was requested.
During the roll call after Rex Burkholder’s vote, Don Benton stated that the Bylaws do not allow Mr. Burkholder to vote on this issue. Chair Miller said that was asked earlier, and it was stated that he was allowed to vote, and asked for clarification. Dean Lookingbill said the Bylaws provide for the 14 members of RTC to have a vote, which Mr. Burkholder is one of. The 12 members of the legislature are ex officio and do not have a vote. He said there was a piece of legislation introduced that talked about whether a project had substantially only Washington impact or not, and Mr. Lookingbill said he saw this as a bi-state project. Mr. Lookingbill said that could be challenged with legal counsel if it turns out to make a difference in the motion passing or not passing. Senator Benton said if it makes a difference in the vote, they will challenge it, because he said the RCW is clear on issues affecting the solely Washington State citizens, which he felt this did saying there is no HOV lane across the river. He said issues solely affecting constituents from Washington, only those who are elected by Washington constituents could vote. Chair Miller asked that the roll call proceed to see what the final vote would be, and then decide if clarification is necessary. Betty Sue Morris said whether it passes or not, she would challenge Mr. Burkholder’s vote as well. She said this was not a bi-state issue. She said we have been waiting for ODOT to make it a bi-state issue, and they have not done it. If it were truly a bi-state issue, she might feel differently about the vote. She said she would be challenging Mr. Burkholder’s vote. Chair Miller asked that the vote continue, and decide from there.
Steve Stuart said the original recommendation did include a recommendation to Oregon. Chair Miller said that recommendation has nothing to do with this motion. This motion is only addressing Senator Benton’s motion. The roll call proceeded.
Marc Boldt Yes Rex Burkholder No Bill Ganley Yes Matthew Garrett No Lynne Griffith Yes Pat McDonnell No Arch Miller No Betty Sue Morris Yes Paul Pearce Yes Royce Pollard No Steve Stuart Yes Don Wagner Abstain THE COUNT WAS SIX YES AND FIVE NO, WITH BOTH OREGON VOTES BEING NO. CHAIR MILLER SAID THAT EITHER WAY, THE MOTION PASSED.
Chair Miller asked what was necessary from RTC for the action. Don Wagner requested a letter be sent from RTC spelling out the recommendation. Chair Miller asked Mr. Lookingbill to create a letter for his signature.
Betty Sue Morris said she felt it was very important to in addition to that to convey to ODOT the vote of the Washington side of the river. She said she resented the idea that both Mr. Burkholder and Mr. Garrett could vote on this issue, and that Mr. Wagner abstained.
Senator Benton said he thought they should get the AG’s opinion on the RCW for clarity. Chair Miller said Mr. Lookingbill would follow up on the issue.
VIII. Other Business
From the Board
From the Director
Mr. Lookingbill noted the Columbia River Crossing Task Force will meet on May 4, 2005, from 4:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. at the Clark County Public Service Center 6th Floor Hearing Room. JPACT would meet May 12, 2005, at Metro at 7:15 a.m. Mr. Lookingbill said at the June 7 meeting, a report would be presented on the Central County/Central Vancouver area, a transit item, and also the needs analysis from the 2030 MTP.
The next RTC Board meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 7, 2005, at 4:00 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
Regional Transportation Council
1300 Franklin Street, Fourth Floor
Vancouver Washington 98660Tel: 360-397-6067
Fax: 360-397-6132
E-mail: info@rtc.wa.govPublic Service Center served by C-TRAN Route 3.
Officers' Row served by C-TRAN Route 32.
If you have special needs, please contact RTC.
       
|