Meeting Date: Monday August 2, 2010 Time: 5 to 7 p.m. Rock Creek Community Church PFG Members Bob Adams Janice Erickson Charlie Rutkowski Mary Beth Cottle John Hartsock (for James Owens) Melody McMurry Patty Freeman Ron Brallier Project Management Team (PMT): Washington County: Howell Consulting, LLC Matt Meier Leslie Howell Rob Saxton Jinde Zhu Magdalena Campuzano General Public/Other Attendees: James Bradburn, Pastor Rock Creek Church Dan Nkemontoh, Youth Pastor, Rock Creek Church Joe Younkins, Principal Engineer, County Welcome and Introductions - Leslie Howell Leslie started the meeting asking everyone to introduce themselves and explain what neighborhood or organization they are representing. Leslie Howell, from Howell Consulting, facilitator for the PFG meetings Matt Meier, Project Manager, Capital Project Management Division, Washington County responsible to see this project through the design and construction stages Jinde Zhu, County Engineering Department, responsible for the traffic study for this project Rob Saxton, Engineering Section, Washington County responsible for the geometry of the project Janice Erickson, former member of Rock Creek Neighborhood Association, resident in Rock Creek for over 20 years, involved in several planning committees; concerns: traffic, noise, safety of pedestrians, Melody McMurry, faculty at Portland Community College (PCC) Rock Creek Campus, neighbor, main concern is the (timely) access of students crossing 185 th to get to PCC. Patty Freemen, Bond Project Manager, Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation District, involved in the project management of the Rock Creek regional trail Charlie Rutkowski, property owner, live directly across the street, the last widening of the road it affected my property, I want to be more involved so things are done right Mary Beth Cottle, CPO 7 representative, unincorporated Washington County Page 1 of 6
John Hartsock, Project Manager, Facilities Development from Beaverton School District (BSD) he is the substitute/alternate member for James E. Owens BSD has two pieces of property at each side of the street Bob Adams, Northshore Neighborhood Association, little neighborhood behind the pond Magdalena Campuzano, County staff, support for the PMT, contact for PFG members Joe Younkins, Capital Project Management Division, Washington County James Bradburn, Pastor Rock Creek Church Daniel Nkemontoh, Youth Pastor Rock Creek Church Leslie explained that PFG binders were prepared for each of the members and distributed. Handouts for this meeting were in the binders. Members were asked to bring their binders and name tents to all future meetings. On each of the future meeting handouts will be distributed and should be organized in the binder. All members confirmed that they received the meeting Agenda via e-mail. All members agreed that e- mail works for sending/receiving meeting reminders and documents. Agenda review Purpose of tonight s meeting - Leslie Howell Leslie went over the Agenda. She explained that the length of this first meeting was due to the amount of information to be presented regarding the project s background. The estimate length for the rest of the meetings is two hours. She explained that the meeting is for the focus group but general public members will always have a chance to address the PFG sometime during the meeting. Leslie explained her role being the facilitator and started by going over the Draft PFG Ground Rules hand outs which include, the PFG and PMT Roles and Responsibilities, Ground Rules, and Communications Guidelines. She began with a few opening comments and asked for additional points or changes from the Focus Group. Those in attendance agreed that no changes were needed in the three documents and that they could abide by them. Leslie said that the three documents would be finalized and provided to the PFG for their notebooks at the next meeting. (They are attached to these meeting notes.) Leslie asked the group if they would like to provide substitutes in the event that they can not attend a meeting. Most members said yes. Leslie explained that each member should tell Matt if they are appointing a substitute and explained that John Hartsock from Beaverton School District was there on behalf of the selected PFG member James E. Owens from the same agency. Leslie also explained that the Member will have the responsibility to bring the substitute up to date and vice versa so he/she can be prepared for the next meeting. All members agreed on having a substitute. Leslie asked the PFG is there were any comments or corrections to the Rules. PFG members agreed with all the Rules. Leslie continued with the Roles and Responsibilities (attached to these meeting notes) that were adopted by the PFG/PMT. Page 2 of 6
Bob Adams Can we invite the group that we represent to these meetings? Not all the neighbors belong to the Neighborhood Association so I can say that I am not representing them all. Leslie Howell Yes, just remember that their participation will be limited. Leslie explained that the agenda for each meeting will be mailed in advance to the PFG. The PFG members can send a request to include an item in the agenda to Matt Meier. Notes for the meeting are being taken and will be transcribed and sent to the PMT and to the PFG for review before the next meeting. The final version of the notes will be put on the project s website. Leslie reminded the PFG members of some main points referred to on the PFG Ground Rules: - Bring your opinion and share it with the Group, and be responsible of taking back the information shared in these meetings to your group - The contact for the media on behalf of the County will be Matt Meier, the Project Manager. - Each PFG member is welcome to represent themselves but not the whole PFG to the media Project Overview, Background and History and Existing Conditions in Project Corridor Matt Meier, Project Manager Matt Meier had a Power Point presentation to explain the different aspects of the project s background and its need. Copies of the presentation will be placed on the project website. Important websites: County Transportation Plan: http://www.co.washington.or.us/lut/divisions/longrangeplanning/publications/transportation-plan.cfm Project list and project s information: http://www.wc-roads.com/ Information on the County s MSTIP: http://www.co.washington.or.us/lut/transportationfunding/transportationsystemfunding/what-ismstip.cfm http://www.co.washington.or.us/lut/transportationprojects/185th-avenue-west-union-to-westview-highschool.cfm?page=activity The group asked questions and discussed several items from the slide show posted speed and design speed proposed Right-of-Way (ROW) compared to the existing ROW location for sound barriers if they are added Page 3 of 6
Traffic Jinde Zhu Jinde reviewed two displays showing existing (2009) and forecast (2030) traffic volumes (copies of the displays were included in PFG binders). In addition, handouts were provided for Traffic Terminology and Evaluating the Need for Future Traffic Signals, which listed signal warrants. Jinde explained that counts were made in April of 2009 and included 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the afternoon: 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m. This period of time includes 1 peak hour and 1 non-peak hour. He explained that the county has 24 hour traffic counts that will be brought to the next PFG meeting. Some of the PFG members questioned the accuracy of the counts based upon their own experience and difficulty with turning left onto 185 th from Adrian. Some members take alternate routes now and are concerned it will be even harder to make a left turn with five lanes, if there is not a signal in place at the intersection of Adrian and 185 th. Jinde went over the processes to determine if a signal should be installed at an intersection. He went on to review the specific signal warrants with the group. He indicated that he had evaluated the intersection of Adrian and 185 th based upon the warrants and that the intersection does not meet the required warrants to justify a signal. He went on to explain that it is important that the county not place signals at intersections where they are not warranted because accident rates tend to increase (because drivers do not expect the signal). When asked about accidents, he reported that there was only one reported accident. Some PFG members questioned this, and went on to say there are many more accidents, but they are not reported. Jinde said that the accident warrant calls for 5 reported accidents in a year. The group discussed the pedestrian warrant at Adrian and 185th. The warrant requires 80-90 pedestrian crossings at the intersection and does not include pedestrians that cross 185 th Ave mid block between Adrian and Westview High School. PFG members pointed out that people do not walk across at Adrian now because it is unsafe. It was pointed out that there are over 2500 children attending the school. John Hartsock said that this school has one of the highest rates of bussing of any of their schools. A request was made for Tri-Met data on how many people get off and on the bus at Adrian. The group discussed the 2030 forecasts. A question was asked about the North Bethany development. Jinde explained that this is included in the traffic forecasts and in fact two forecasts were made, one with Road A through the North Bethany area and one without it. Members of the PFG expressed concern about the ability to turn out of their neighborhood onto 185 th with these higher numbers. Jinde explained that having two lanes in each direction will create larger gaps in the traffic. In addition he pointed out that the center turn lane can be used as a refuge. The members discussed several options and scenarios on how to get out using Adrian. A question was asked about a future trail planned by THPRD and how users will cross 185 th. Patty Freeman showed the possible trail location and clarified that her agency submitted their project for review by the County, who will decide the outcome. She feels the warrants are not the only reason to provide a signal and hopes the county will consider what other jurisdictions are doing based upon safety and need. Planned Improvements - Rob Saxton Page 4 of 6
Rob discussed the existing 3 lane cross section and the proposed typical 5 lane cross section. He explained that the typical 5 lane cross section is a typical section and that the actual project cross section will be changing all along the project depending on ROW. Concern was expressed that the 4 foot planter strip is not adequate to grow trees. Patty mentioned that the street trees may not grow very well in this size planter because root space is very limited. Matt Meier pointed out that the project will hire a landscape architect to determine the appropriate type of trees to be planted. Rob mentioned a few noteworthy improvements that are planned for the project: At Adrian Street sight distance will be improved Storm water quality improvements Bike lanes and sidewalks along the length of the project Street lighting Mary Beth Cottle Will the lights be Dark Sky friendly? The item was included in the Issue Bin so it can be discussed at a future meeting. The group discussed the accuracy of the cross sections and the strip map. It was pointed out that the cross sections are general in nature and there will be site specific information available as we move forward in design. The PMT also explained that the aerial map is not an accurate base map for design purposes and that the handout is just intended to provide some context. When the county brings a proposed design (probably to the next meeting) it will be on a surveyed base map. The possibility of sound walls was discussed, and Leslie pointed out that the noise expert will be invited to the next meeting for a detailed discussion of this issue. Public Involvement Process Leslie Howell Among the handouts there is chart which will be our road map as we advance in the public involvement process. She anticipates that it may be modified as we move forward, but she wanted to give the group a sense of what to expect. The initial estimate is that there will be at least four PFG meetings, about monthly, and an Open House in December 2010 or January of 2011 where we will present all the work done by the PFG and the proposed design for the project. The last Open House planned is before construction starts, where the public will have the chance to meet the contractor. Report on first Open house May 27, 2010 Matt Meier The PFG was provided a summary of the first open house in their binders. Matt provided a few highlights. The design team will review the comments receive and consider them as they move forward in design. The PFG was encouraged to review the summary and familiarize themselves with the comments received by the county. Matt will continue to catalog comments that come in through the website and share them with the design team. Public Comment - Leslie Page 5 of 6
There were no members of the public present who wanted to address the PFG. Future PFG Meetings: - End of Meeting Notes - The PFG members indicated that the meeting location (Rock Creek Community Church) works. They discussed the best time and decided 5-7 pm represents a good compromise between those who would like it earlier and those who prefer later. After some discussion they chose Tuesday nights. Following is a tentative list of meeting dates pending confirmation of the meeting room and staff availability: Meeting #2: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 Time: 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Rock Creek Church 4470 NW 185th Ave. Portland, OR 97229 Meeting #3: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 Time: 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Rock Creek Church Meeting #4: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 Time: 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Rock Creek Church Note: Future meeting times and locations have been confirmed by PFG members since the initial meeting. Issue Bin: Bring 24 hours traffic counts Follow-up discussion regarding signal at Adrian Check Tri-Met on and off counts at bus stop Provide more information of negative impacts when signals are not warranted Confirm dark sky friendly lighting will be installed Consider possibility of extending 20 mph speed limit all the way to Adrian Consider County right-of-way agent to come to a PFG meeting for a ROW process presentations Page 6 of 6