Opportunity Gateway Program Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

March 16, 2005

In attendance:

Staff and Guests in attendance:

Not in attendance:

1. Welcome from the Chair

Dorene, as Acting Chair, opened the meeting at 6:35 p.m. and welcomed the members. She informed everyone that there would be a re-arrangement of the agenda order: Dan Layden of the Office of Transportation in conjunction with Mike Abbate of GreenWorks, P.C., would present an update on aspects of the 102nd Avenue Street Improvement Project after an update from PDC Housing Department staff members on the status of the latest attempt to acquire what is commonly known as the “Bingo Site”.

2. Bingo Site Acquisition Update

Sara introduced Ryan Moore, Associate Project Coordinator in the Housing Department at PDC, who updated the PAC on the latest negotiations to acquire the Bingo Site from the Ukrainian Bible Church.

Ryan said that decision-makers at PDC found the present terms of the Ukrainian Church’s offer to be unreasonable. Asking price for the property had escalated some $300,000 since the last Purchase & Sale Agreement was previously entered into between PDC and the Ukrainian Church in February 2004. The Church wanted only 60 days to close the present sale.

Ryan added that the sellers of the Bingo Site had said they put the property on the open market and had received a “draft offer” of $1.5 million from an undisclosed buyer.

Ryan said he had followed up by making several calls to the sellers but had not received call-backs. He told the PAC that PDC was open to further negotiations but had problems with identifying funds for a land purchase of this amount at the present time in the Gateway URA.

Sara added that staff is hard-pressed in presenting an acceptable case to PDC decision-makers for pursuing purchase of the Bingo Site in view of repeated past negotiation failures with the property owners.

3. Update on Federal Funding for Gateway Transportation Improvements

Dan Layden updated the PAC on the good news regarding potential federal funding allocation of gas tax revenues for special transportation projects in Gateway. Dan said that the 102nd Avenue Street Improvement Project will get a good portion of the allocation which is to be voted on by the House of Representatives within the next few weeks due to the efforts of Oregon’s U.S. Congressman Earl Blumenauer. $4.7 million have been earmarked for Gateway improvements. Dan said the congressional bill itemizing the allocation will then move to the Senate, and, if passed, on to the President. He added that $700,000 is currently available for the 102nd Avenue Project.

Todd Sears, president of RCM Construction Co. asked Dan if the 102nd Avenue improvements are actually a line item on the congressional bill. Dan responded that 102nd Avenue is indeed a line item on the bill.

4. Answers to Concerns relating to the 99th & Glisan Realignment

Dan then fielded questions regarding the completed 99th & Glisan Realignment Project. Computer modeling and observation shows that the 99th Ave. intersection is working much better than it did prior to realignment. He said traffic volume and metered entry signals located at the I-205 on-ramp tend to back up traffic to 99th during peak times, but that left turn signals would only exacerbate the situation. He assured the PAC that the traffic signals can be adjusted if required.

5. Presentation and Discussion of 102nd Avenue Project Preferred Options

Dan gave a “thumbnail sketch” of the history of the102nd Avenue Project. Dan talked about the efforts of the Transportation Subcommittee, saying the group and gone through a variety of iterations of the project and had narrowed it down to the options that the committee most favored. It will be at least a year before construction begins.

Dan went through each of the street design options elaborating on all. Similar design concepts and materials options had been discussed and presented at previous PAC meetings and open houses in Gateway.

Dan then moved on to the “Streetscape Concept Preliminary Design” and covered the elements of medians, bike lanes and purchases of Right-of-Ways (ROWs) wherever possible for construction of fifteen foot wide sidewalks.

Mike Abbate said his firm had been working on the project for about a year now. In working with the project subcommittee and through open houses they had arrived at three (3) preliminary streetscape options each involving different schemes of sidewalk pavers, ornamental lighting, benches and tree-grates.

Alesia asked if the gray “furniture zone” of sidewalk pavers would be installed with a constant width along the boulevard. Mike replied that it would.

A second scheme was presented with different pavers, benches, traditional (or commonly used in Portland) lighting fixtures, and tree-grates. Frieda wondered if these pavers are rain water permeable to which Mike replied that they are not.

The third option was displayed which offered pavers permeable to rain water. Weeds can come up through these and maintenance is necessary. Dan said that total redevelopment would involve treatment and storage of stormwater. He said that the plan is to use the existing stormwater collection system, that sumps are in place and that the DEQ (Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality) believes the existing system to be adequate for the plan. Freida commented that redevelopment of the Prunedale area would involve stormwater treatment and storage. Dan concurred that building local streets in Prunedale would require stormwater treatment. Joe Rinella added that there exist dry wells in the area to accommodate stormwater.

Dan said that BES (City’s Bureau of Environmental Services) allows for either permeable or non-permeable pavers but that the issue is with property owners along 102nd who don’t want to deal with maintenance related to permeable pavers. Mr. Rinella stated that above-ground telephone poles and lines are eyesores. Dan responded that funds for the project cannot be used to place utilities underground. Connections to properties must be made by the property owners at their own expense, which is rather costly. Mike added that the project is not a good mechanism to fund underground utilities. Frieda wondered if, during project construction, a conduit could be installed to allow for future transition to underground utilities. Dan replied that it’s much more expensive and complex than that. Mike added that modular concrete paver units can be lifted up to make adjustments or additions to underground utilities infrastructure.

Mike went on to present the preferred alternative streetscape concept which includes Portland traditional ornamental single-light fixtures, custom tree grates and benches with three seat arches and no back. Sidewalk pavers are three different tones of brick, that have a color gradation from light to dark as they near the curb. The Portland single-light fixtures have a variety of paint color options.

Dan then discussed the subcommittee’s preferred concept with photos of existing conditions and simulations. Mike went on to talk about current “Cobra” street lighting which exists only on the west side of 102nd. He said that the plan is to move about half of these lights to the east side of the street and intersperse them with traditional ornamental single-light fixtures.

Mike went over the preferred intersection concepts for 102nd and Glisan.

Dan said they are working with property owners to get rights-of-way at all corners of the intersection in order to produce a similar treatment at each.

Alesia commented that she was glad that they had moved away from the wall concept because it was too “fortress like”. Ted expressed concern about irrigation for grasses used in landscaping and wondered if drought-tolerant grasses would be planted. Mike said that contractors are responsible for maintenance and irrigation of shrubbery and grasses for a two-year establishment period and after that the responsibility goes to the property owners. Mr. Sears commented that landscaping is as important as building.

Mike discussed correction of the angular intersection at 102nd and Halsey. The street design calls for making shorter distances for pedestrians by straightening. He covered concepts for the “jug-handle’ turnaround at 102nd & Weidler and the possibility of installing a stainless steel “Gateway Arch” sculpture at a median or crosswalk location on Weidler at the intersection.

Mike said that with construction of street improvements there will be truckloads of concrete without reinforcing bar to be disposed of and that it could be used to do some visual sculpture with a series of terraces within the jug-handle. The material is free. He also pointed to a simulation showing two rows of poles, east to west and north to south intersecting this park concept. The poles would be 20 foot flexible poles. Conifers would be planted in the area as well.

Dan said everything is still in the concept stage.

He responded to those expressing a need for left turn signals at the intersection that it would require four more traffic signal poles in addition to other poles already in use at that location and that would not be feasible.

Dan said there is still some conceptual “playing around” as the plan moves into the engineering phase. He is looking for a PAC recommendation on the concept before taking it to the City Council in late spring, summer, or early fall. When federal funding is approved there will be further engineering and construction will commence.

Dorene asked the members of the audience if they thought that the preferred design concept is on the right track and asked that they comment on elements they really like or don’t like. Dan added that the perspective is to be as flexible as possible and that it is a project with design that will mostly be determined by members of the Gateway community. Joe said that he appreciated Dan showing real consideration for existing businesses and homes and added that it is a shame not to place utilities underground due to the expense.

Comment was made that business signage prominently placed at some locations (Winchell’s, for example) tends to “cheapen” the appearance of the area. By contrast, quality signage, such as at the Children’s Receiving Center, if used along the boulevard, could add a degree of sophistication.

Ted asked if future signage could be unique to Gateway. Freida commented that Strasbourg, France has unique, antique-ish street signage. Steve said that the city has no similar requirements on business signage.

Jackie Putnam said that the plan is great and wanted to know why it stops at Glisan. She added that the Washington / 102nd intersection is dangerous. Dan responded that the project does go to Washington Street but the intersection treatment there has not yet been determined.

Linda Robinson commented that she liked the treatment at corners and the re-use of concrete.

Dion Glisan asked about lighting. She wondered if there would be about sixty percent more lighting, if solar lighting was possible and what costs are involved. Mike agreed that some areas are quite dark and that there will not be a glaring change but that moving half of the Cobra lights to the east side of 102nd will even out lighting. Phil added that our climate does not produce enough solar gain to generate adequate street lighting. The tops of some bus shelters will store solar energy.

Mr. Sears asked that the signaling at intersections not be changed, especially at Weidler. He said to do the special treatment of the intersection corners with landscaping.

Dorene asked if there were any comments other than about 102nd. She said that the pedestrian walkway north of Glisan has no medians in the concept and asked why the medians could not be placed closer to the intersection to be more protective of pedestrians.

Dan said they will move the medians closer.

Phil said bus shelters and stops treatment need to be incorporated into the plan.

Freida asked if all on-street parking was being done away with to which Dan replied yes, - it is being replaced with bike lanes.

Ted commented that there is a variety of unique trees in Gateway, height, seasonality, etc.

Mike described the Ginko tree and the possibility of planting unique fan-shaped trees.

Dorene said that we need an approval by the PAC of the Design Concept and Streetscape Project Phase I from Halsey-Weidler to Glisan. It was moved that it be put to a vote and Bob seconded the motion. Dorene, Freida, Bob, Grace, Merced, Ted, Jerry, Alesia, Carol, and Dann all voted in favor. Steve, Phil, and Laurel were in attendance but as advisory members of the PAC are non-voting.

Dorene deferred the discussion of PAC member nominations to the April 20th meeting. She adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m.

###

The next meeting of the OpportunityGateway Program Advisory Committee will be Wednesday, April 20, at 6:30p.m. at the PortlandAdventistMedicalCenter, Amphitheater C.


Sign-up title graphic  for PDC's News & Information E-mail Lists Go back to top of page
View the e-mail archive | Unsubscribe from our e-mail Lists
 
Find us on:  
FacebookYouTubeTwitter  


Portland Development Commission | 222 NW Fifth Ave | Portland, OR 97209-3859
Phone: 503-823-3200 | Fax: 503-823-3368
Banner picture of Portland Skyline
Background for Banner