The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 02/14/2012 . 1 TIGARD City of Tigard TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING February 14, 2012 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I: \Design & Communications\Donna\City Council \ccpkt1 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard- or.gov ' City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting - Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: February 14, 2012 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION A. Discuss Proposed Amendment to Resolution No. 07 -13 to Renew the City's Incentives to Annex until February 2013 B. Administrative Items • Groundrules Feedback • Council Liaison Report Reminders • Legislative Update - State House Bill 4090; Federal House Rule 7 • Joint Meeting with Beaverton City Council and Metro Representatives on April 10, 2012, 6:30 p.m. at Beaverton City Hall. Agenda topics include: Climate Smart Communities Findings, SW Corridor Briefing, Urban Growth Boundary Concept Planning • Council /City Center Development Agency Calendar: • February • 21* Tuesday - Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • 28* Tuesday - Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • March • 6 Tuesday - City Center Development Agency — 6:30 p.m., Red Rock Creek Conf Rm • 13* Tuesday - Council Business Meeting -- Canceled • 20* Tuesday - Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • 27* Tuesday - Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • April • 3 Tuesday - City Center Development Agency — 6:30 p.m., Red Rock Creek Conf Rm • 10* Tuesday - Joint Meeting with Beaverton at Beaverton, 6:30 p.m., • 17* Tuesday - Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • 23 Monday - Budget Committee Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Public Works Auditorium • 24* Tuesday - Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall • 30 Monday - Budget Committee Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Public Works Auditorium • EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Center Development Agency will go into Executive Session to discuss real property transaction negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(e). All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. Study Session - Page 1 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING -- FEBRUARY 14, 2012 A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Council Communications & Liaison Reports E. Call to Council and Staff for Non - Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:35 p.m. - time is estimated A. Follow -up to Previous Citizen Communication: No follow up. B. Tigard High School Student Envoy - Courtney Bither C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce - Debi Mollahan will present the Chamber report on 2/28/2012. D. Citizen Communication — Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 7:45 - time is estimated A. Approve City Council Meeting Minutes for: 1. December 13, 2011 2. December 20, 2011 3. January 10, 2012 4. January 17, 2012 5. January 24, 2012 B. Receive and File: 1. Council Calendar 2. Tentative Agenda C. Add the Sunrise Property Purchase to the List of 2006 Metro Bond Projects and Approve an Agreement Regarding the Property RESOLUTION 12 -03 - A RESOLUTION ADDING THE SUNRISE PROPERTY TO TIGARD'S LOCAL SHARE PROJECT LIST AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) WHEREBY WASHINGTON COUNTY WILL MAKE A $400,000 CONTRIBUTION TO PARTIALLY FUND THE PURCHASE OF THE SUNRISE PROPERTY (Business Meeting Agenda - Page 1 D. Add Two Trail Projects to the List of 2006 Metro Bond Projects RESOLUTION NO. 12 -04 - A RESOLUTION ADDING TWO TRAIL PROJECTS TO TIGARD'S LOCAL SHARE PROJECT LIST E. Initiate the Transfer of Jurisdiction of a Portion of Barrows Road to the City RESOLUTION 12 -05 - A RESOLUTION INITIATING ACTION TO TRANSFER JURISDICTION OF A PORTION OF SW BARROWS ROAD (COUNTY ROAD NO. 812) WITHIN THE CITY OF TIGARD TO THE CITY OF TIGARD F. Authorize the Submission of a Grant Application to Partially Fund the Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Improvement Project RESOLUTION NO. 12 -06 - A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SUBMISSION OF A BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART WATER AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANT APPLICATION TO PARTIALLY FUND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR) WELL HEAD IMPROVEMENTS • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council /City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. NAME THE TIGARD LIBRARY COMMUNITY ROOM THE "GEORGE AND YVONNE BURGESS COMMUNITY ROOM" - RESOLUTION 7 :55 p.m. - time is estimated The following individuals plan to attend the Council meeting for this item: David Burke (Chair), Cecilia Nguyen, and Linda Monahan from the Library Board. Kathy Sleeger from the Friends of Library. All may have brief comments. RESOLUTION NO. 12 -07 - A RESOLUTION NAMING THE COMMUNITY ROOM WITHIN THE TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY TO HONOR GEORGE AND YVONNE BURGESS FOR THEIR SERVICE TO THE CITY OF TIGARD AND AS THE TIRELESS LEADERS OF THE FRIENDS OF THE TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY 5. PRESENTATION BY METRO COUNCILOR CARL HOSTICKA ON CLIMATE SMART COMMUNITIES SCENARIOS PROJECT 8:05 p.m. - time is estimated Kim Ellis, Metro Principal Planner, is expected to present this report with Councilor Hosticka. 6. REVIEW AND DISCUSS THE PROPOSED 2012 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA 8:30 p.m. - time is estimated 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 8:40 p.m. - time is estimated 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS Business Meeting Agenda - Page 2 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 10. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m. - time is estimated Business Meeting Agenda - Page 3 , t al3 Lb AIS -757 A Business Meeting A. Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Discuss Proposed Amendment to Resolution No. 07 -13 to Renew the City's Incentives to Annex until February 2013 Prepared For: Ron Bunch Submitted By: Gary Pagenstecher, Community Development Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg - Study Sess. Information ISSUE Overview of proposed process for extending to February 2013 Resolution No. 07 -13, which defines incentives for voluntary annexation of unincorporated lands to the municipal city limits, and initial discussion of overall annexation policy and efforts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff requests that council review the process for amending Resolution No. 07 -13 extending voluntary annexation incentives within the context of a broader discussion on annexation policy. Staff proposes council consider the amended resolution at its February 28th business meeting to ensure continuation of the existing policy. In addition, the agenda item includes time for an initial discussion of council's direction on the 2012 goals to reevaluate the annexation policy and develop a philosophy and approach to consider annexations, including islands. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY As stipulated in Resolution 11 -08, council's annual review of its annexation policy, including annexation incentives, is to occur in February 2012. Res. 07 - 13 expanded annexation incentives to include: 1) waiver of the city annexation application fee for all annexation requests, and 2) phasing in of city property taxes over a three -year period at the rate of 33 %, 67 %, and 100 %. The resolution required an annual review of these practices. Later, through Resolution 07 -47, council decided to add payment by the city of Metro's annexation mapping fees. City staff then began the practice of assisting applicants with property descriptions provided it does not involve field work. Resolutions extending the incentives were adopted annually after the initial adoption. OTHER ALTERNATIVES NA COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS 2012 City Council Goal 4. Annexation a. Re- evaluate the city's annexation policy. b. Develop a philosophy and approach to consider annexations, including islands. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Resolutions extending the incentives were adopted in 2008, 2009, 2010 and on February 22, 201 1. Attachments Res No. 07 -13 Res No. 11 -08 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07- t 5 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD ESTABLISHING POLICY TO GUIDE CITY ACTIONS PERTAINING TO ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORATED LAND TO THE MUNICIPAL CITY LIMITS WHEREAS, Oregon law provides standards and procedures that permits annexation of unincorporated lands to cities and the City of Tigard has adopted, as part of its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan, guiding policies pertaining to annexation; and WHEREAS, Washington County and the City of Tigard have, by intergovernmental agreement, mutually determined: a) the extent of an area called the Tigard Urban Services Area (TUSA) within which the City shall be the ultimate provider of urban services and, b) these lands shall be eventually part of the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, accessible governance and complete urban services are essential to the quality of urban life and annexation is a necessary means to: a) ensure delivery of complete urban services to the TUSA, and b) guarantee the cost of services are more equitably shared among all those that use them; and WHEREAS, annexation is an important tool to establish and maintain regular and logical city boundaries necessary for effective planning for public facilities services; the provision of said services and timely response by law enforcement; and WHEREAS, parts of Tigard's municipal boundary are irregular and confusing, and there exists unincorporated lands (islands) completely surrounded by the City; and this situation is incongruous with the City's responsibility to promote the effective and efficient provision of urban services; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard offers a wide range of benefits to its citizens including, full urban services; proximate and responsive governance and political representation; opportunities for civic participation, and quick to respond law enforcement, and consequently many property owners within the unincorporated TUSA have expressed interest in annexation; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to promote the benefits of being part of the City and wishes to encourage voluntary annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City shall not resort to involuntary annexation of unincorporated land, except in cases where it is found that such action is in the overall City's interest, such as to resolve public safety and /or health issues where it is necessary to extend or provide essential City services consistent with an adopted Community RESOLUTION NO. 07 /3 Page 1 Investment Plan (CIP) or Public Facility Plan (PFP), and /or resolve incongruous municipal boundaries. SECTION 2: Tigard shall work with other cities, Washington County, Metro and the state to promote regional and statewide policies and actions that recognize that logical, efficient and economically sustainable urban development can best occur in existing incorporated cities. SECTION 3: The City shall proactively promote the benefits of being within the municipal City limits and invite owners of unincorporated properties to voluntarily join the City. However, each annexation shall be evaluated on its own merits to ensure it is in the City's overall interests. SECTION 4: The City shall communicate with and otherwise work directly with those that express voluntary interest in annexation to facilitate the annexation process. This shall include providing incentives to annex such as the following: • Waiver of the City annexation application fee until July 1, 2008. • Phasing in of increased property taxes over a three -year period at the rate of 33 percent, 67 percent, and 100 percent, for properties that annex during the period of March 13, 2007 to February, 2008, per Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR 150 - 222.111). SECTION 5: In consideration that conditions and circumstances change over time, the City Council shall revisit this policy in February 2008 and make changes if warranted. SECTION 6: This resolution takes is effective upon passage. 3 PASSED: This / day of 2007. Mayor -ty of Tigard ATTEST: nA7t- City Recorder - City of Tigard 4 RESOLUTION NO. 07 - Page 2 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 11- 0 2 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 07 -13 TO EXTEND THE INCENTIVES FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORATED LANDS TO THE MUNICIPAL CITY LIMITS TO FEBRUARY 2012. WHEREAS, Resolution 07 -13 establishes policy to guide City actions pertaining to annexation of unincorporated lands to the municipal City limits, and provides incentives to annex, including waiver of the City annexation application fee until July1, 2008 and phasing in of increased property taxes over a three -year period at the rate of 33 percent, 67 percent, and 100 percent, for properties that annex during the period of March 13, 2007, to February 2008 per Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR 150 - 222.111); and WHEREAS, Resolution 07 -47 amends Resolution 07 -13 to expand the incentives to include City payment of the Metro mapping/ filing fee until July 1, 2008; and WHEREAS, the City's operational and administrative procedures have been to assist in the preparation of legal descriptions as long as they do not require field survey work and to waive the pre - application conference fee for individual property owners interested in voluntary annexation; and WHEREAS, Resolution 08 -12 amends Resolution 07 -13 to extend the offer of incentives to annex until February, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 09 -12 on February 24, 2009 to continue to offer incentives to property owners who voluntarily annex to the City until February 2010; WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 010 -12 on February 9, 2010 to continue to offer incentives to property owners who voluntarily annex to the City until February 2011; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution 07 -13 is hereby amended to renew the offer of incentives to annex until February 2012, including: • Waiver of the City annexation application fee; • Phasing in of increased property taxes for properties that annex during the period of March 13, 2007, to February, 2012, per Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR 150- 222.111); • City payment of the Metro mapping /filing fee; • Assistance in the preparation of legal descriptions, not to include field survey work; and • Waiver of the pre - application conference fee for individual property owners interested in voluntary annexation. SECTION 2: An annual review of the annexation policy and associated incentives shall occur concurrently. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. RESOLUTION NO. 11 - (/ Page 1 nc! PASSED: This day of ` Jl , 2011. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: 1/ti City Recorder - City of T RESOLUTION NO. 11 - SS Page 2 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON a // Di TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET RESOLUTION NO. 12- FOR '' a 1 / 1 t& D A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 07 -13 TO EX1ENfP+1 TNCWI R VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORAI'ED LANDS TO THE MUNICIPAL CITY LIMITS TO FEBRUARY 2013. WHEREAS, Resolution 07 -13 establishes policy to guide City actions pertaining to annexation of unincorporated lands to the municipal City limits, and provides incentives to annex, including waiver of the City annexation application fee until July1, 2008 and phasing in of increased property taxes over a three -year period at the rate of 33 percent, 67 percent, and 100 percent, for properties that annex during the period of March 13, 2007, to February 2008 per Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR 150 - 222111); and WHEREAS, Resolution 07 -47 amends Resolution 07 -13 to expand the incentives to include City payment of the Metro mapping / filing fee until July 1, 2008; and WHEREAS, the City's operational and administrative procedures have been to assist in the preparation of legal descriptions as long as they do not require field survey work and to waive the pre - application conference fee for individual property owners interested in voluntary annexation; and WHEREAS, Resolution 08 -12 amends Resolution 07 -13 to extend the offer of incentives to annex until February, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 09 -12 on February 24, 2009 to continue to offer incentives to property owners who voluntarily annex to the City until February 2010; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 10 -12 on February 9, 2010 to continue to offer incentives to property owners who voluntarily annex to the City until February 2011; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution 11 -08 on February 22, 2011 to continue to offer incentives to property owners who voluntarily annex to the City until February 2012; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 2011, City Council set goals for 2012 including Goal 4, Annexation to a) Re- evaluate the city's annexation policy, and b) Develop a philosophy and approach to consider annexations, including islands. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution 07 -13 is hereby amended to renew the offer of incentives to annex until February 2013, including. • Waiver of the City annexation application fee; • Phasing in of increased property taxes for properties that annex during the period of March 13, 2007, to February, 2011, per Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR 150- 222.111); • City payment of the Metro mapping /filing fee; • Assistance in the preparation of legal descriptions, not to include field survey work; and RESOLUTION NO. 12 - Page 1 • Waiver of the pre - application conference fee for individual property owners interested in voluntary annexation. SECTION 2: Review of the annexation policy and associated incentives shall occur annually, and pursuant to 2012 Council Goal 4, Annexation, a process for review shall be established. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2011. Mayor - City of Tigard A U EST: City Recorder - City of Tigard , , ' / / % '� �, , A ,ice; RESOLUTION NO. 12 - Page 2 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR a /i/Jaoia Notes from Council training with Joe Hertzberg 1/31/12 (DATE OF MEETING) + S5.cJ1 Guidelines T -U U • Pay close attention and make sure you are hearing people accurately. • Our most important job is to listen to each other, citizens and staff. • Teamwork is key to success as a Council — different perspectives, common goals. No superstars. More successful together than as individuals. • We must work as a team. • Each of us must know the pulse of the community through personal experience, surveys, etc. Everyone's opinion matters, not just those few we hear from. • Share the time fairly to get all of our ideas on the table. Balance communication. • Everyone gets the chance they need to express their opinion. • Each Councilor represents all the citizens. • Each Councilor brings something different to the team. Don't step on it. Rely on one another's knowledge and experience. • Act professionally, treat one another with respect • No surprises i:\adm\marty and joanne \1 -31 -12 - council notes from joe hertzberg training.docx - A o-7-1. cr ,•, Department of Land Conservation and Development _' re 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 �' Salem, Og4 ,% J oh A Kitchaber M.D., Governor Phone (503) on 373 -0050 97301 -25 RECEIVED Fax: (503) 378 -5518 0 www.oregon.gov/LCD FEB 0 71 2012 January 25, 2012 MU Ci o f Ti and . Adm '� Craig E. Dirksen, Mayor SUPPLEM NT L PACKS - �sS ��+� City of Tigard t�� I 13125 SW Hall Boulevard FOR (ATE OF MEETING) a \ 1A \ao Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: LCDC Hearing on Metro Urban Growth Boundary Amendment ` e`! Q - & Dear Mayor Dirksen: Thank you for your letter outlining your concerns regarding the timing of the Land Conservation and Development Commission review of the Metro urban growth boundary (UGB). While we understand your concerns, we have received 14 letters of objection including approximately 45 different objections which we are required to evaluate and to make a recommendation to the commission regarding whether to sustain or deny each one. Some of the objections raise complex legal or policy arguments, and all of them require thorough consideration in order for our recommendation to be fair to the parties and complete for the commission. For the commission to hear the matter at its March meeting, the Depai lment of Land Conservation and Development's report to the commission would need to be released by February 23. We are diligently working on our review, but it is very unlikely that it can be done in an acceptable manner by February 23. Additionally, the decision will not be final on the date of the commission hearing. An order will need to be prepared, and there is a 60 -day period for appeals of the decision to the Court of Appeals. In summary, we will assess our progress and place the matter on the March commission agenda if it is possible, but I don't expect that to be the case. Sin Acting Director c: Tom Hughes, Metro President Mayor Jerry Willey, City of Hillsboro Mayor Denny Doyle, City of Beaverton Anne Debbaut, DLCD Regional Representative 14 \ 11/4 TIGARD �� February 13, 2012 City of Tigard House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET 900 Court St. NE, Room 453 FOR ) ►L-1 I a71 `a Salem, OR 97301 (DATE OF MEETING) RE: Opposition to HB 4090 and -6 Amendments Dear Committee Members, The City of Tigard stands with the League of Oregon Cities in opposing HB 4090 Urban Services Providing Sanitary Sewer or Water Services and the -6 amendment. The legislation would require the extension of urban services regardless of the local decision making process concerning planning and annexation. Our concerns are rooted in five areas: ✓ Increase costs to local governments: This bill would require service providers, including cities, to serve some developments now and serve the rest later, regardless of the proximity or cost of providing the services. ✓ Loss of SDCs to address needed infrastructure: Allowing development at urban densities for lands remaining within the county precludes the ability of the city to collect the impact fees to address the increased demand created by development in the urban growth boundary areas. ✓ Undermines citizen determined annexation: This bill effectively nullifies local charter provisions for voter - approved annexations and local determinations on matters of growth. ✓ Taxation and service inequities: HB 4090 creates taxation and service inequities between City residents, who pay city taxes to provide urban services and amenities, and the extra -urban developments within the county, which are able to utilize and increase the demand for those urban services and amenities, but at a much lower taxation rate, of which no revenue is paid to the city. ✓ Non - remonstrance agreements: The legislation will force the early provision of urban infrastructure services to county lands, thereby promoting their development at urban densities without addressing the impacts to the adjacent city, and in many cases, while being subsidized by the city tax payers. In sum, allowing urban development and densities in the county leads to inefficiencies, financial inequities and the loss of local decision making concerning development impacts. We therefore respectfully urge your opposition of HB 4090 and the -6 amendment. Sincerely, CraiiE. Dirksen, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard or.gov IN ;I '4 21 1 \OVA 4RD , City of Tigard February 15, 2012 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR l4/ a 01 p The Honorable Suzanne Bonamici (DATE OF MEETING) U.S. Representative 2338 Rayburn HOB Washington, DC 20515 Dear Congresswoman Bonamici: As H.R. 7, the American Energy and Infrastructure Act, comes to the House floor for consideration, we want to highlight some provisions that are of importance to our city. Support Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to School We urge you to support the Petri/Johnson amendment that would preserve dedicated funding, based on 2009 levels, for transportation enhancement and safe routes to school activities. Since 1992, TE and safe routes to school projects have delivered far more value to local communities in economic development, safety, and quality of life improvements than they cost in capital. Local communities like ours need the support of Congress in prioritizing these projects. These are investments that generate new tax revenue at the local, state, and federal level while delivering billions in economic, environmental and health benefits at a time when our community critically needs this type of strategic growth. Support TIGER program We urge you to support the Waters amendment to appropriate $500 million per year for TIGER grants for FY 2013 and FY 2014. TIGER typically funds projects that are large, frequently multi-modal and have a strong economic development component. The TIGER program was designed to ensure these important projects, which have difficulty receiving adequate funding, are expedited and constructed. Thank you for your commitment to issues impacting local governments. We appreciate your consideration of our request as the transportation reauthorization bill moves forward. Sincerely, Craig E. Dirksen, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tieard- or.gov Tigard High School 9000 SW Durham Rd. • Tigard • Oregon • 97224 (503) 431 -5518 SUP PLEME AL PACKET February, 14 2012 / Student Envoy: Courtney Bither FO i _ OF MEETING) Activities j- rr) 17 1. Human Rights week took place the 6 through the 10 with the theme of Respect your Neighbor. Alongside this campaign we had an assembly on the 8 with Lou Radja from the Congo come to speak to us. 2. Senior Citizens Prom was held yesterday in the cafeteria from 1 -3 pm and was a huge success with the Tualatin Valley Jazz Band playing for us. Athletics 1. Wrestling had a home meet on the 2n versus McNary. 2. Tigerettes hosted a competition this past Saturday the 11 and they will be competing at Parkrose on the 18 3. Basketball continues on through this month on Tuesdays and Fridays as well as swimming that has meets most every Thursday. 4. Winter Track athletes are just starting to transition over to spring track. Arts 1. Rhythm Fest was hosted by the THS Drumline and Color Guard on the 4` 2. Ink 3 is having performances at the end of this month and the beginning of next month. 3. Seussical has made its way over to Tigard for our spring musical. Academics 1. The semester ended on the 2n and we had finals the entire week preceding. 2. New classes started this past week on the 6`''. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 -D CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: February 14, 2012 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address_ City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION AIS -803 3. A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve City Council Meeting Minutes Submitted By: Cathy Wheatley, Administrative Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Approve City Council meeting minutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve minutes as submitted. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached council minutes are submitted for City Council approval. (Dates of meetings are listed under "Attachments" below.) OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments December 13. 2011 December 20, 2011 January 10, 2012 January 17, 2012 January 24. 2012 AIS -804 3. B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Agenda Title: Receive and File: Council Calendar and the Tentative Agenda Submitted By: Cathy Wheatley, Administrative Services Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Receive and File: Three -Month Council Calendar and the Tentative Agenda STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY N/A OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Three -month City Council calendar. Tentative Agenda of Upcoming Council /Budget Committee /City Center Development Agency Meetings Agenda Item No 3B1 For Agenda of December 13, 2011 • February 14, 2012 MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council /City Center Development Agency Board FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder RE: Three -Month Council /CCDA Meeting Calendar DA'Z'E: February 3, 2012 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk ( *). February 14* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 21 * Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 28* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall March 6 Tuesday City Center Development Agency — 6:30 p.m., Red Rock Creek Conference Room 13* Tuesday Council Business Meeting -- Canceled 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall April 3 Tuesday City Center Development Agency — 6:30 p.m., Red Rock Creek Conference Room 10* Tuesday Joint Meeting with Beaverton City Council & Planning Commission /Metro, 6:30 p.m., Beaverton City Hall, 4755 SW Griffith Drive, Beaverton 17* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 23 Monday Budget Committee Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Public Works Auditorium 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 30 Monday Budget Committee Meeting — 6:30 p.m., Public Works Auditorium L \ adm \cit council \council calendar \3 -month calendar for c mtg 120214.doc Agenda Item No. J , E Key: Meeting of / /</lr;?O /a, Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 2/6/2012 10:52 AM - Updated # Form Date Submitted By TYepeeing Title Department Inbox or I Finalized 570 02/21/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: 1 Location: Wheatley Tigard City Hall 1 11 652 02/21/2012 Nadine CCWKSHOP 20 Minutes - Tigard Municipal Court Annual Report Administrative Wheatley C, City - I Robinson Services Recorder 681 02/21/2012 Sean Farrelly CCWKSHOP 60 Minutes - Annual Joint City Center Development Community Farrelly S, Redev Agency /City Center Advisory Commission Meeting Development Project Manager Total Time: 80 of 180 minutes have been scheduled - -- - --- 1 568 02/28/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: l Location: Wheatley Tigard City Hall I 1 1 772 02/28/2012 Liz Lutz ACCSTUDY 30 Minutes - Review of 2013 Community Event Financial and Lutz L, Conf Exec Funding Requests 1 Information Asst Services Total Time: 30 of 45 minutes have been scheduled 11 778 02/28/2012 Liz Lutz ACONSENT Consent Item - Resolution Waiving Temporary Sign Financial and Lutz L, Conf Exec Permit Fees for Tigard Youth Football Information Asst Services 1 1 1 682 02/28/2012 Greer Gaston CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Informational Public Hearing to Public Works Berry G, Project Consider a Resolution Finalizing Sanitary Sewer Engineer Reimbursement District No. 42 ( SW 100th Avenue) 709 02/28/2012 Cheryl Caines CCBSNS 5 Minutes - FIELDS HEARING CONTINUATION Community Caines C, Assoc Development Planner 738 02/28/2012 Carissa Collins CCBSNS 25 Minutes - Supplemental Amendment to the FY Financial and Collins C, Sr Mgmt 2012 Budget Information Analyst (Fin Adm) Services 1 Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 2/6/2012 10:52 AM - Updated 758 02/28/2012 Susan CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Public Hearing to Amend Tigard Community Hartnett S, Asst CD Hartnett Municipal Code Chapter 1.16 and to Create a New Development Director Title 6 768 02/28/2012 Gary CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Renew Annexation Incentives and Community Pagenstecher G, I Pagenstecher Discuss Annexation Policy Direction -- Resolution Development Assoc Planner 782 02/28/2012 Joanne CCBSNS 5 Minutes - Proclaim March Earthquake Awareness City Management 01/31/2012 I Bengtson Month Al Total Time: 110 of 110 minutes have been scheduled Meeting Full I 11 794 03/06/2012 Cathy AAA CCDA Meeting - March 6, 2012 (Mayor and Councilor I Wheatley Henderson will be absent.) 571 03/13/2012 Cathy AAA March 13, 2012 Meeting is Canceled. I Wheatley I - I 573 03/20/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: March 20, 2012 1 Absences to Note: I I Wheatley Location: Tigard City Hall 1 I 693 03/20/2012 Judith Gray CCWKSHOP 90 Minutes - High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan Community Gray 3, Sr Presentation - Joint Session with Planning Development Transportation Commission Planner 708 03/20/2012 Cheryl Caines CCWKSHOP 45 Minutes - JOINT MEETING WITH THE TREE Community Caines C, Assoc I BOARD Development Planner Total Time: 135 of 180 minutes have been scheduled II 572 03/27/2012 Cathy Meeting Date: March 27, 2012 1 Absences to Note: 1 I Wheatley Location: Tigard City Hall I— — - - -_—T. I 781 03/27/2012 Loreen Mills ACCSTUDY 20 Minutes - Executive Session - Pending Lit (City Management 01/26/2012 Total Time: 20 of 45 minutes have been scheduled 11 Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 2/6/2012 10:52 AM - Updated 612 03/27/2012 John Goodrich CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Approve Ordinance to Amend Title 12 - Water Public Works Gaston G, Conf I and Sewer Executive Asst 785 03/27/2012 Joanne CCBSNS 5 Minutes - Proclaim April 15 -22, 2012 National Days of City Management 01/31/2012 Bengtson Remembrance 701 03/27/2012 Steve Martin CCBSNS 20 Minutes - Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution to Public Works Martin S, Parks Adopt Park System Development Charges (SDCs) Manager 737 03/27/2012 John Floyd CCBSNS I10 Minutes - Intergovernmental Agreement with Clean Community Floyd J, Associate I ater Services Development Planner 745 03/27/2012 Gary CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Revise Planning Commission Bylaws Community Pagenstecher G, Pagenstecher (Resolution) and Amend Tigard Municipal Code Chapter Development Assoc Planner 2.08 (Ordinance) I Total Time: 75 of 110 minutes have been scheduled 17931104/03/2012IC Wheatley IAAA ICCDA Meeting - April 3, 2012 11 1 II 1 ---- �......... 574 04/10/2012 Cathy AAA Jt. Meeting with Beaverton City Council & Planning Wheatley Commission /Metro - Beaverton City Hall, 6:30 p.m. - Climate Smart Communities ~ -- -11 575 04/17/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: I Absences to Note: 1 Location: Tigard City Wheatley Hall I 11 607 04/17/2012 Todd Prager CCWKSHOP 60 Minutes - Urban Forestry Code Revisions Discussion Community Hartnett S, Asst CD' Development Director 776 04/17/2012 Alison Grimes CCWKSHOP 20 Minutes - Joint Meeting with the Library Board Library Barnes M, Library I Director 'Total Time: 80 of 180 minutes have been scheduled i I 1790104/23/2012ICarol Krager 'AAA 'Budget Committee Meeting - Public Works Auditorium 1 I I 11 3 Key: Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Meeting is Full . Workshop Meeting ❑ City Council Tentative Agenda 2/6/2012 10:52 AM - Updated 576 04/24/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: 1 Location: Tigard City Hall I Wheatley ■ -_ -II 643 04/24/2012 Greer CCBSNS 30 Minutes - Selection of a Concept Design for Pacific Public Works McCarthy M, I Gaston Highway /McDonald /Gaarde Intersection Improvements St /Trans Sr Proj Eng 784 04/24/2012 Marissa CCBSNS 20 Minutes - Arbor Day: Receive Tree City USA Growth Award Community Laughlin D, Conf. I Daniels and Present Tree Stewardship Awards Development Exec. Asst. Total Time: 50 of 110 minutes have been scheduled II 787 04/30/2012 Carol AAA Budget Committee Meeting - Public Works Auditorium I Krager I- i t 795 05/01/2012 Cathy AAA CCDA May 1, 2012 I Wheatley I. II 789 05/07/2012 Carol AAA Budget Committee Meeting - Public Works Auditorium City Management 02/01/2012 I Krager I-- II 577 05/08/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: 1 Location: Tigard City Hall I Wheatley I q 791 05/14/2012 Carol AAA Budget Committee Meeting - Public Works Auditorium (If City Management 02/01/2012 I Krager needed) II 578 05/15/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: 1 Location: Tigard City Hall I Wheatley II 579 05/22/2012 Cathy AAA Meeting Date: 1 Absences to Note: 1 Location: Tigard City Hall I Wheatley 11 608 05/22/2012 Todd Prager CCBSNS 90 Minutes - Legislative Public Hearing - Urban Forestry Code I Revisions 4 AIS -770 3. C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Add the Sunrise Property Purchase to the List of 2006 Metro Bond Projects and Approve an Agreement Regarding the Property Prepared For: Steve Martin Submitted By: Steve Martin, Public Works Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Shall the council adopt a resolution: • Adding the Sunrise property to Tigard's list of 2006 Metro bond projects? • Authorizing the city manager to execute an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) in which Washington County makes a $400,000 contribution to partially fund the purchase of the Sunrise property? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2006, voters passed Metro's natural areas bond measure. A portion of the bond measure funds were allocated to park providers like Washington County and the City of Tigard. The city purchased the 20 -acre Sunrise property in May 2011. Funds for the $5 million purchase came from Tigard's $17 million park bond measure passed by voters in November 2010. In October 2010, Washington County approved a $400,000 contribution from its 2006 Metro bond measure allocation to partially fund the Sunrise property purchase. To receive the contribution, the council must adopt the attached resolution authorizing the IGA with Washington County and Metro and adding the purchase of the Sunrise property to its 2006 list of Metro bond projects, known as Tigard's local share project list. The IGA: • Requires Tigard to add the Sunrise property to its 2006 local share project list, so the property is eligible for Metro bond funding. • Authorizes the transfer of $400,000 in Metro bond funds from Washington County to the City of Tigard in accordance with bond requirements. • Specifies Tigard will accept the $400,000 contribution to partially reimburse Tigard park bond funds used to purchase the Sunrise property. • Specifies Tigard will be solely responsible for the ownership, management, supervision and control of the Sunrise property. Acceptance of the Metro funding does place certain restrictions on the property. Funds can only be used to acquire or improve parks, open space, natural areas or trails. There are also restrictions should the property be sold or transferred to a different entity or used for a purpose other than those specified. The IGA was reviewed by the city's real estate attorney. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to adopt the resolution and to forgo the $400,000 contribution. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS 2012 Tigard City Council Goal No. 1.c. - "Deliver on the promise of the voter - approved park bond by identifying all acquisition opportunities and completing the majority of park land acquisitions and improvements by the end of 2012." DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first time this item has come before the council. Fiscal Impact Cost: None Budgeted (yes or no): N/A Where Budgeted (department /program): Not applicable Additional Fiscal Notes: Assuming the council adopts the resolution and the IGA is executed by all parties, Tigard will receive $400,000 in revenue from Washington County. The revenue will be used to partially reimburse the $5 million in Tigard park bond funds used to purchase the Sunrise property. In short, Tigard will have an additional $400,000 that will be used to fund other park bond acquisitions and /or improvements. Acceptance of the Metro funding does place certain restrictions on the property. Funds can only be used to acquire or improve parks, open space, natural areas or trails. There are also restrictions should the property be sold or transferred to a different entity or used for a purpose other than those specified. Attachments Resolution IGA with County and Metro AIS -783 3. D. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Add Two Trail Projects to the List of 2006 Metro Bond Projects - Resolution Prepared For: Kim McMillan Submitted By: Greer Gaston, Public Works Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Shall the council adopt a resolution adding two trail projects to Tigard's list of 2006 Metro bond projects? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the Council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2006, voters passed Metro's natural areas bond measure. A portion of the bond measure funds were allocated to park providers, such as the City of Tigard. Approximately $127,000 in Metro bond funding is available for city trail projects. Originally these dollars were earmarked to construct a segment of the Fanno Creek Trail on the Brown property. However, this project does not rank as high priority because it is not fully funded. The city would like to use its bond funding to construct two other segments of the Fanno Creek Trail. The first segment is between Main Street and Grant Avenue on property owned and maintained by the city. The second segment is between Grant Avenue and Woodard Park. This trail segment will be constructed on easements that will be owned and maintained by the city. If approved, this resolution will add the trail projects to the list of bond projects the city submitted to Metro in 2006, (Tigard's local share list). This addition will make these projects eligible for Metro bond funding. Acceptance of the Metro funding comes with certain restrictions. Funds can only be used to acquire or improve parks, open space, natural areas or trails. There are also restrictions should the property be sold or transferred, or used for a purpose other than those specified. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to adopt the resolution; the trail projects would be ineligible for Metro bond funding. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS 2012 Tigard City Council Goal No. 1.c. - "Deliver on the promise of the voter - approved park bond by identifying all acquisition opportunities and completing the majority of park bond acquisitions and improvements by the end of 2012." The Main Street to Grant Avenue trail segment is included in the 2011 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first time this item has come before the council. Fiscal Impact Cost: None Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department /program): Not applicable Additional Fiscal Notes: The city has approximately $127,000 in Metro local share funds available for trail projects. Originally, these dollars were earmarked to construct a segment of the Fanno Creek Trail on the Brown property. However, this project is not a high priority because it is not fully funded. In adding the Main Street to Grant Avenue and Grant Avenue to Woodard Park trail projects Tigard's local share project list, the city would be able to access bond dollars now and expedite the construction of two active trail projects. Acceptance of the Metro funding comes with certain restrictions. Funds can only be used to acquire or improve parks, open space, natural areas or trails. There are also restrictions should the property be sold or transferred, or used for a purpose other than those specified. Attachments Resolution AIS -677 3. E. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Initiate the Transfer of Jurisdiction of a Portion of Barrows Road to the City Submitted By: Greer Gaston, Public Works Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Shall the council adopt a resolution initiating the transfer of jurisdiction of a portion of Barrows Road to the city? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The council was briefed on this transfer of jurisdiction at its January 17, 2012, workshop meeting. Background A segment of SW Barrows Road, from SW Scholls Ferry Road to SW Walnut Street, lies within the City of Tigard and is under the jurisdiction of Washington County. (Tigard city limits follow the centerline of the road.) In 2009, a bridge along this section of Barrows Road was showing signs of failure and was slated to be closed by the county. Area residents asked to keep the bridge open, so the City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and Washington County entered into an agreement in which: • The three entities agreed to share costs and repair the bridge. • The county, at its expense, agreed to perform a pavement maintenance overlay on this section of Barrows Road. • The cities of Beaverton and Tigard agreed to assume joint jurisdiction of this section of Barrows Road. Once bridge repairs and the pavement overlay were completed, the transfer of jurisdiction was to occur within 60 days. The work was completed in September 2009. Beaverton initiated the transfer of the northwesterly half of the road in 2010. It was recently brought to the city's attention that Tigard had not initiated the transfer of jurisdiction for the southeasterly half of the road. The Transfer Process The transfer process begins with a council resolution requesting Washington County commissioners transfer jurisdiction of this section of Barrows Road to the city. County commissioners then act on the request and execute the transfer. The attached resolution initiates the transfer process for the southeasterly half of SW Barrows Road (County Road No. 812) that extends from SW Scholls Ferry Road (County Road No. 348) to SW Walnut Street. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to request the transfer of jurisdiction. However, this would be in direct conflict with Resolution No. 09 -28A adopted on May 12, 2009. This resolution approved the agreement between the City of Tigard, the City of Beaverton and Washington County. The agreement included a provision that, when the bridge repairs and the pavement overlay were completed, Tigard would assume jurisdiction of a portion of SW Barrows Road. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS F None DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The council was briefed on this transfer of jurisdiction at its January 17, 2012, workshop meeting. On May 12, 2009, the council adopted Resolution No. 09 -28A. This resolution approved the agreement between the City of Tigard, the City of Beaverton and Washington County. The agreement included a provision that, when the bridge repairs and the pavement overlay were completed, Tigard would assume jurisdiction of a portion of SW Barrows Road. ' Fiscal Impact Cost: None * Budgeted (yes or no): N/A Where Budgeted (department /program): Not applicable Additional Fiscal Notes: There are no direct costs associated with the transfer of jurisdiction. * With the adoption of the resolution, the city will incur on -going street maintenance costs for the southeasterly half of SW Barrows Road from SW Scholls Ferry Road to SW Walnut Street. Actual street maintenance costs for this section of Barrows Road have not been calculated. Attachments Resolution and Exhibits AIS -779 3. F. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Authorize the Submission of a Grant Application to Partially Fund the Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Improvement Project - Resolution Prepared For: Dennis Koellermeier Submitted By: John Goodrich, Public Works Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Information ISSUE Shall the council adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to partially fund the ASR well head improvement project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In fiscal year 2007 -2008, the city successfully drilled its third ASR well. The 1,000- foot -deep well was capped until well head improvements could be constructed. The improvements, scheduled to take place in 2012 and 2013, include the installation of a pump, motor, piping and a chlorination system. The well has the storage capacity to provide 2.5 million gallons of water per day during periods of dry weather. The city requested a $750,000 grant, (the maximum funding level available), to partially fund the well head improvement project. The grant requires a 50- percent, or $375,000, match. This project is included in the city's 2011 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and the total project is $2.74 million. Assuming the council approves the proposed funding for fiscal years 2012 -2013 and 2013 -2014, the city would contribute $2 million to the project, which exceeds the required match. CIP project costs are allocated as follows: FY 2011 -2012 11 FY 2012 -2013 II FY 2013 -2014 5265,000 11 $2,421,000 1 $50,000 If grant funding is awarded and accepted, the city would be committed to fund its share of the project. In order to meet the federal deadline, staff submitted a Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Water and Energy Efficiency grant application in mid - January. Should the council decide not to adopt this resolution, the grant application would be withdrawn. A copy of the 74 -page grant application is available upon request. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Should the council decide not to adopt this resolution, the grant application would be withdrawn. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS This project is identified in the: • 2010 Water System Master Plan. • 2011 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION None Fiscal Impact Cost: N/A Budgeted (yes or no): N/A Where Budgeted (department /program): Not applicable Additional Fiscal Notes: The City is seeking $750,000 in grant funding for a project that is already included in the Adopted Budget and CIP. The grant requires a 50- percent, or $375,000, match. This project is included in the city's 2011 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and the total project is $2.74 million. Assuming the council approves the proposed funding for fiscal years 2012 -2013 and 2013 -2014, the city would contribute $2 million to the project, which exceeds the required match. CIP project costs are allocated as follows: ll FY 2011 -2012 II FY 2012 -2013 1 FY 2013 -2014 I $265,000 II $2,421,000 1 $50,000 II If grant funding is obtained and accepted, the city would be committed to fund its share of the project. Any cost savings resulting from the grant would be re- allocated to other projects identified in the 2010 Water System Master Plan, including the Lake Oswego- Tigard Water Partnership. Attachments Resolution P- IlaDia Co( Uacink C11.4,4 Item # Newsletter. 3,p 2 10 - IZ City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: The Honorable Mayor and City Councilors SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR ."tir. From: Public Works Director Dennis Koellermeier (DATE OF MEETING) Re: Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB) Recommendation Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Improvement Project Grant Date: February 9, 2012 At its February 14, 2012, meeting, the council is scheduled to consider a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to partially fund an ASR improvement project. This resolution appears on your consent agenda. The IWB was briefed on the grant application at its meeting last week. The board unanimously supported the application and made a formal recommendation that the city apply for the grant. Council packets have already been distributed for this meeting, but I wanted to make the council aware of the IWB's recommendation. c: Cathy Wheatley AIS -777 4 Business Meeting • Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Name the Tigard Library Community Room the "George and Yvonne Burgess Community Room" - Resolution Prepared For: Margaret Barnes Submitted By: Alison Grimes, Library Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Information ISSUE Approval of a resolution naming the Tigard Library Community Room the "George and Yvonne Burgess Community Room" in honor of their service to the City of Tigard and as tireless leaders of the Friends of the Tigard Library. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Request approval of the resolution naming the Library Community Room the "George and Yvonne Burgess Community Room ". KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • George and Yvonne Burgess have been supporters of the Tigard Library for more than 30 years, and each of them individually headed the Friends of the Library during that time. • George Burgess served on the Library Board, the Library Construction Task Force, the City's Budget Committee, Friends of the Tigard Library, and the Tigard Public Library Foundation in one or more of these capacities from 1979 until his death in November 2011. • George and Yvonne Burgess organized, facilitated, and led the collection, organization and sale of thousands of books, audio and video materials with the total proceeds donated to support the Tigard Library and its programs. Under George and Yvonne's leadership, the Friends have donated more than $500,000 to the library in the past 30 years. • George and Yvonne Burgess inspired volunteers within the City of Tigard to support library programs and to participate in numerous community events sponsored by the Friends of the Tigard Library. • The Tigard Public Library, completed in 2004, features a community room where the Friends' numerous used book sales have been held, raising thousands of dollars to benefit the library and its patrons. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Proposed Resolution Letter to City Manager - Library Community Room January 12, 2012 Marty Wine, City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Request under Resolution No. 99 -37 — Naming of the Tigard Public Library Community Room for George and Yvonne Burgess Dear Marty: In November 2011, the Tigard community was devastated to learn that George Burgess had passed away. George was involved in many Tigard activities including serving as a member of the Budget Committee. But, George's true passion was the Tigard Public Library. He and his wife Yvonne "were" the Friends of the Library for many years as together they organized and held countless used book sales with all of the proceeds benefitting the Library. George was instrumental in assisting the City to identify the need for, and gain support for, the financing of the present Library that was opened in 2004. Among the earliest uses of the Library was the used book sale that George and Yvonne held in the Community Room. Since the first sale held in that room, George, Yvonne and the Friends have conducted an additional 12 to 14 sales there. Each time, George was the person who organized, set up and facilitated the sale. Each year the proceeds of the sale exceeded the prior year with the Library receiving all of the proceeds. The proceeds allowed the Library to hold numerous events, often with the Friends sponsoring the participation of a local or famous author or a music group. The Library Board would like to honor George and Yvonne for their devotion to the Library and the many small and large acts they completed that promoted the Library as the amazing community resource that it is. Without George and Yvonne's efforts the Library would not be able to deliver programs and services that have had such a far - reaching effect to bring people of all ages and economic circumstances to the Library. George and Yvonne wanted every citizen of Tigard to find in the Library something of value that would enrich their life. If the success of the programs that the Friends sponsored is any indication, he and Yvonne certainly achieved his goaL At its Board meeting of January 12, 2012, the Tigard Library Board unanimously passed a motion to request that the City Council pass the attached resolution entitled: A RESOLUTION NAMING THE COMMUNITY ROOM WITHIN THE TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY TO HONOR GEORGE AND YVONNE BURGESS FOR THEIR SERVICE TO THE CITY OF TIGARD AND SPECIFICALLY AS THE TIRELESS LEADERS OF THE FRIENDS OF THE TIGARD LIBRARY 1 We recognize that you may need to modify the attached resolution in some way to make it acceptable for the Council. However, we hope that you will make sure that the resolution expresses the many contributions that George and Yvonne have made to Tigard. Specific Proposal and How it Meets the City's Established Criteria On June 8, 1999, the Tigard City Council adopted Resolution No. 99 -37 that established a policy on placing memorials in City parks. The resolution includes criteria used for the naming of distinct elements within City -owned parks and building. The Resolution provides for memorials that can be "placed at distinct elements of City -owned properties such as shelters, sports fields, gardens, etc." The full resolution speaks to the naming of buildings and park properties to honor individuals or groups. This seems to allow for the naming of an element of a building, as is the case for within parks. The reasons that it would be appropriate to name the Community Room after George and Yvonne Burgess are as follows: • George Burgess was a supporter of the Tigard Library for over 30 years and served on the Library Construction Task Force, the Tigard Public Library Foundation and the Friends of the Tigard Public Library in one or more of these capacities during the period of time from 1979 until his death in November 2011. • George and Yvonne Burgess organized, facilitated and led the collection, organization and sale of many thousand books, audio, and video materials with the total proceeds donated to support the Tigard Public Library and its programs. • George and Yvonne Burgess inspired volunteers within the City of Tigard to support library programs and to take part in the numerous community events that the Friends of the Tigard Public Library sponsored. • The Tigard Public Library, completed in 2004, features a community room that has been the site of numerous used book sales conducted by the Friends of the Tigard Public Library, raising thousands of dollars to benefit the library and its patrons. • The most recent Friends sale took place in September 2011 with George and Yvonne Burgess tirelessly present and leading the two -day event to a record - setting level of sales that will be contributed to support the Tigard Public Library. • Lasting evidence of George Burgess' contributions to the success of the Tigard Public Library is needed to recognize his contributions and to inspire those who follow to emulate his commitment and efforts. • Naming the Tigard Public Library Community Room to honor George and Yvonne Burgess with the placement of a nameplate at the entrance to the room will insure that George and Yvonne Burgess' contributions are acknowledged and appreciated by the Citizens of Tigard. Resolution No. 99 -37 requires that an interested party submit a written request to the City Council regarding the building that it is interested in having Council name in honor of an individual. Please accept this letter and supporting information as the Board's request that the City Council designate the Tigard Public Library Community Room as the George and Yvonne Burgess Community Room. We suggest that a day be selected, consistent with Yvonne's wishes, where the City and the Library Board may hold a ceremony to commemorate the naming of the Community Room. 2 We hope that our request will be received with enthusiasm by the Council. If any addonal information is needed to support our request, please let me lcnow. Sincerely, 1/4 bCiA/ 4 6 David Burke • Chairman Tigard Public Library Board • • 3 AIS -773 5 • Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Presentation by Metro Councilor Carl Hosticka on Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project Submitted By: Cathy Wheatley, Administrative Services Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Information ISSUE Metro Councilor Carl Hosticka will present information on Metro's Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • Presenter: Councilor Carl Hosticka (Metro staff will be present in audience to answer questions) • Topic: Climate Smart Communities Scenarios (for more information, please see the project website: http:// www. oregonmetro .gov /index.cfm /go /by.weh /id =36945 ) The following is from Metro's website: The Portland metropolitan area has made great strides in creating vibrant neighborhoods, providing transportation options and protecting farmland. Many of these policies have saved us money on gasoline and preserved clean air and water. Building on these efforts, Metro and the State of Oregon have launched a multiyear project to learn what it will take to reduce emissions from cars, small trucks and SUVs as we grow the regional economy and create more vibrant neighborhoods. The intent is to see how addressing climate change can help us create more of the communities and neighborhoods we've been building for many years, while meeting state greenhouse gas reduction targets. A collaborative, three -phase approach... In a three -phase process, the region will study scenarios that represent what the region could look like in the future, with different land use and transportation policies in place. The idea is to find the most effective combinations of policies and strategies that will help the region meet Oregon's targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The first phase consists of testing strategies and policies on a regional level and reviewing published research on the strategies tested. The second phase will allow more detailed analysis of alternative strategies and policies for different communities within the region. This will allow for variation and local goals to be realized even as we reach for the regionwide goal of emissions reduction. Finally in the third phase, leaders from across the region will adopt a regionwide strategy that includes varying local aspirations while tackling the challenge of climate change. Climate Leadership Summit, April 2011... A panel discussion at the Climate Leadership Summit featured local business, community and political leaders who are improving the region's quality of life while also reducing carbon emissions. To gather input on the strategies the region will consider, Metro convened a Climate Leadership Summit April 1, 2011, at the Oregon Convention Center. More than 250 policymakers, community and business leaders participated in a discussion about the opportunities and challenges raised by various land use and transportation strategies. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Metro Memo 600 NE Grand Ave. www.oregonmetro.gov Portland, OR 97232 -2736 503 - 797 -1700 503 - 797 -1804 TDD 503 - 797 -1797 fax OD Metro 1 Memo Date: February 2, 2012 To: Mayor Craig Dirksen and the Tigard City Council From: Kim Ellis, principal transportation planner Subject: Findings from first phase of Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project At your February 14 meeting, Metro Councilor Carl Hosticka and I will share the findings from the first phase of the Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project. The findings report, which is attached to this memo, was accepted in January by the Metro Policy Advisory Committee, the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation, and the Metro Council. The Oregon Department of Transportation and the Department of Land Conservation and Development included the findings report in their joint progress report to the Oregon Legislature, which was submitted in late January. The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project is a multi -year, collaborative effort between Metro and its regional partners. The project is focused on working together to find the right combination of land use and transportation actions (e.g., policies and investments) that will keep communities vibrant and prosperous. The project also helps our region meet state targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from light duty vehicles. The project continues to be as much about jobs, livable communities and public health as it is about a healthy environment. During Phase 1, a technical work group composed of planning staff from cities, counties and other agencies worked closely with Metro staff to test and evaluate 144 different combinations of various strategies that could help reduce our region's greenhouse gas emissions. The results indicated that our region and our communities are on the right track with current policies and investments, and that there are many ways to meet state targets to reduce emissions. We also found that achieving the targets will require additional investments and policy commitments at the local, regional and state levels. In Phase 2 of this project, which will run through 2012, Metro will be working closely with you and other local policy makers and community leaders across the region to define how best to continue advancing local efforts to build livable, prosperous and equitable communities while meeting the region's greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. At our presentation on February 14, Councilor Hosticka and I will share information about what we have learned and seek your input on how we can best work together to support the aspirations of your community. Some questions to consider for our discussion: • How can we best work with you to keep you involved and informed as the Scenarios Project moves forward? • What actions are you currently taking to create jobs and expand housing and transportation choices that will also help the region meet the state greenhouse gas emissions reduction target? • What kinds of investments or support do you need to fully realize your community's vision for the future? • How do we ensure the region's approach is inclusive and equitable, reflecting the diverse needs and interests of its people, and not perpetuating disparities, particularly among households of modest income or people of color? Page 2 February 2, 2012 Memo to Mayor Craig Dirksen and the Tigard City Council Findings from first phase of Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project • How do we ensure the regional strategy provides greater economic opportunity for everyone, creating jobs and boosting development and competitiveness? More information about the Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, including the Phase 1 Findings and Strategy Toolbox, are located on the Metro website at www. oregonmetro .gov /climatescenarios. We look forward to the February 14 discussion and continuing to work with you as the Scenarios Project moves forward. /attachment CLICK HERE FOR FULL REPORT - .41', Oti ( f5 t414; Imo reA 411111 A- Oreci©g., • "- " _ Bend Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project Understandin Our Land Use an T ransportation Choices PHASE 1 FINDINGS I JANUARY 12, 2012 �� Metro 1 Making a great place CLICK HERE FOR FULL REPORT www. oregonmetro .gov /climatescenarios I i t / y sefir x i s JOIE 4 4 r f f Climate Smart Communities: Scenarios Project Strategy Toolbox for the Portland metropolitan region Review of the latest research on greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies and the benefits they bring to the region October 2011 00 Metro 1 Making a great place g g � April 2011 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR ?Jiq c'' OL ry ) , r (D OF MEETING) "r '" �`r 4 , ' www. oregonmetro .gov /climatescenarios Climate Smart eimm ° ° "te Regional Communities Scenarios • Eg it II :nate kadmhn�� ;''.'n r �, " . Background • Making. :: put Arm In 2007, the Oregon Legislature established - /-7, ' , t..- - . ,I, tkIn.r ,.a,,,,.,"ar,,m statewide goals to reduce carbon emissions — ti ^. ` calling for stopping increases in emissions by - 2010, a 10 percent reduction below 1990 levels .1 , - �a r r - ,,, by 2020, and a 75 percent reduction below al. `"` 1990 levels by 2050. The goals apply to all �' - The 2040 Growth Concept - the region's adopted growth The region's six desired sectors, including energy production, buildings, management strategy outcomes solid waste and transportation. In 2009, the Oregon Legislature passed House State response Oregon Sustainable Bill 2001, directing the region to "develop two Transportation Initiative or more alternative land use and transportation The Oregon Department of Transportation scenarios" by January 2012 that are designed and the Department of Land Conservation and to reduce carbon emissions from cars, Development are leading the state response small trucks and SUVs. The legislation also through the Oregon Sustainable Transportation mandates adoption of a preferred scenario Initiative. An integrated effort to reduce carbon after public review and consultation with emissions from transportation, the initiative will local governments, and local government result in a statewide transportation strategy, implementation through comprehensive plans toolkits and specific performance targets for the and land use regulations that are consistent region to achieve. with the adopted regional scenario. The Regional response Climate Smart Climate Smart Communities Scenarios effort Communities Scenarios responds to these mandates and Senate Bill 1059, which provided further direction to The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios effort scenario planning in the Portland metropolitan will build on the state -level work and existing area and the other five metropolitan areas plans and efforts underway in the Portland in Oregon. metropolitan area. The project presents an Metro's Making the Greatest Place initiative opportunity to learn what will be required to resulted in a set of policies and investment meet the state carbon goals and how well the decisions adopted in the fall of 2009 and strategies support the region's desired outcomes. throughout 2010. These policies and A goal of this cffort is to further advance investments focused on six desired outcomes implementation of the 2040 Growth Concept, for a successful region, endorsed by the Metro local plans and the public and private Council and Metro Policy Advisory Committee investments needed to create jobs, build great in 2008: vibrant communities, economic communities and meet state climate goals. prosperity, safe and reliable transportation, Addressing the climate change challenge will environmental leadership, clean air and take collaboration, partnerships and focused water, and equity. Making the Greatest Place policy and investment discussions and decisions included the adoption of the 2035 Regional by elected leaders, stakeholders and the public to Transportation Plan and the designation identify equitable and effective solutions through of urban and rural reserves. Together these strategies that create livable, prosperous and policies and actions provide the foundation healthy communities. for better integrating land use decisions Metro's policy and technical advisory committees KN Metro with transportation investments to create will guide the project, leading to Metro prosperous and sustainable communities and Council adoption of a "preferred" land use and to meet state climate goals. transportation strategy in 2014. About Metro Climate smart communities scenarios project timeline Clean air and clean water do not l stop at city limits or county lines. 2011 2012 2013 — 14 Neither does the need for jobs, a thriving economy, and sustainable Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 transportation and living choices for people and businesses in the 4, \W/O region. Voters have asked Metro to help with the challenges and Understanding Shaping . -r Building opportunities that affect the 25 choices the direc the strate cities and three counties in the Portland metropolitan area. A regional approach simply makes sense when it comes to providing Jan 2012 Fall 2012 2013 June 2014 services, operating venues and Accept Direction on Release hybrid Adopt preferred making decisions about how the finding; alternative alternative strategy; region grows. Metro works with scenarios to scenario begin communities to support a resilient be tested implementation economy, keep nature dose by and respond to a changing We are here climate. Together were making Phase 1 a great place, now and for Understanding the choices that are underway in the region (e.g., SW generations to come. (We are here) Corridor Plan, Fast Metro Connections Stay in touch with news, stories and The first phase of regional-level scenario Plan, Portland Plan, and other local land things to do. p analysis will occur during summer 2011 use and transportation plan updates). www.oregonmetro.gov /connect and focus on learning what combinations By the end of 2012, Metro's policy Metro Council President of land use and transportation strategies committees will be asked to confirm a Tom Hughes are required to meet the state greenhouse "draft" preferred scenario that will be Metro Council gas emissions targets. Strategies will include brought forward to the final phase of transportation operational efficiencies that the process. Shirley Craddick, District 1 can ensure faster, more dependable business Ph 3 Carlotta Collette, deliveries; more sidewalks and bicycle Building the strategy and District 2 facilities; more mixed use and public g gY Carl Hosticka, implementation District 3 transit - supportive development in centers Kathryn Harrington, and transit corridors; more public transit The final project phase during 2013 and District a service; incentives to walk, bike and use 2014 will lead to adoption of a "preferred" Rex Burkholder, public transit; and user -based fees. land use and transportation strategy. The District s analysis in this phase will be conducted Barbara Roberts. Potential impacts and benefits will be District 6 weighed against the region's six desired using the region's most robust analytic Auditor outcomes. Findings and recommendations tools and methods — the regional travel Suzanne Flynn from the analysis will be reported to demand model, MetroScope and regional Metro's policy committees in fall 2011 emissions model, MOVES. Additional before being finalized for submittal to the scoping of this phase will occur in 2012 Legislature in January 2012. to better align this effort with mandated regional planning and growth management Phase 2 decisions. Shaping the direction This phase will identify needed changes x a In 2012, the region will analyze more to regional policies and functional plans, f refined alternative regional -level scenarios and include updates to the Regional e 3 that apply the lessons learned from phase Transportation Plan and region's growth 1 to develop a "draft" preferred land use management strategy. Implementation of and transportation scenario. This phase approved changes to policies, investments, provides an opportunity to incorporate and other actions would begin in 2014 at r* Metro 9 strategies and new policies identified the regional and local levels to realize the through local and regional planning efforts adopted strategy. s • , • . 'w - f r ,L__, BIM ME _ , - 1 L _ ___ __ Washin • R 1 Po aR c l , 1.j II a l i' ` 0 1 Keizer Oregon - knee ... Vdllt4 •'" limate Smart Communities Scenarios Project ° Understanding Viii,,, Our Land Use and Transportation Choices PHASE 1 FINDINGS I JANUARY 12, 2012 40, Metro 1 Making a great place •. L The Portland m i- 1 11 \f-AA, A In L . ' etropolitan region Island w, = i�l ._ . u •: 3 B ur l ington CI 30 / _, ':� Vancouver il . ■ finks ze , , r, , North '- - - . :4. ©-.' - - - - - 14 r plaihs._ i n. . 7 4 ' St Johns •.,.. NO,y ' Camas y� t'•. W Bethany • � - Washougal 1 j nio n 1 , Z I J: \ - maw, _ - 4 r.1 ` • 'Rockcreek i . : \•, \• Parkros l i p Ta ngs, ourne • N. ' 1 i r.._. sly' m ` i k • Orenco `+, Oak Cedar „• •.{ Maywood Trout ale _ •. \,.` ..` . -C Hills Mill Holl wood - +` - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ y Park Q Fairview?' t Forest ' Hillsboro zB r \•., orn iu- ' �_� Rt3ckwood / ;'blood w Q • Grove 1 -., Portland Gateway �.d Village .6 } 1 4. , Sunset z, to r �Ceda _ o ' Htlls +a n"�w- .,�,�� _ ` ' �'- ■0 Aloha {,Ati ,� '- s ; 3 zs 1 Gresham I � ' i . Lents Rts ,• Beaverton Rale 1 aT I 10 ® 6 Hills �Hillsdale E Washington Pleasant o Farmington �` West Portland _ + - Valley« MULTNOMAH Square Gaston ' — ' -' I - i v _. allb.� - , - r CLACKAMAS ' Milwauki? � Happy n• 1 - I � -0' MULrNOMAH �t City y.. i Valley Tigard i CLACKAMAS Boring Cla ckamas Damascus Msuray/Scholls - A s . odo t4 n WASHINGTON /a „ � 9® Lake . O a k , 26 YAMHILL it r I — Kul Oswego Grove Johnson '. d'Lake Grove r .. ® dX� _ i � - r In Durhafi i' -,� i ` j .:.� ~ 43 .s `� ` f. yra Barton S dy ■ R iv erg rove ♦ ! k • o, • I t TUalatln - Stafford 1 adS, Qr I e _ . . - " ‘4100,,i,,..,„ is - 3 West i Sherwoo r Linn ` ti ! _ Ore `' A.+. _ _i _ _ r e 3 City ' ' , Willamette �Canema �. • Eagle Creek Urban growth 7 T . --1 boundary I \` ,. •.^' N. County boundary .Newberg Wilsonville] t' v .. a ,. • �� we. av C4I dee r a Li --e Estacada '1-.— / a Y CLACKAMAS r�rtr k > a . MARION Metro Canby 0 Miles 10 Barloyr J 2 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Acknowledgements Table of contents Technical Work Group Acknowledgements 3 Tom Armstrong, City of Portland Kenny Asher, City of Milwaukie Executive summary 4 Andy Back, Washington County Introduction 6 Chuck Beasley, Multnomah County Why this work matters 7 Karen Buehrig, Clackamas County A collaborative approach 9 Lynda David, Regional Transportation Council Oregon joins other states, regions and communities to lead the way 10 Jennifer Donnelly, Department of Land Conservation and The challenge for our region 12 Development Denny Egner, City of Lake Oswego Principles to guide our approach 13 Jessica Engelmann, TriMet Phase 1: methods and tools 14 Brian Gregor, Oregon Department of Transportation Phase 1: findings 16 Mara Gross, TPAC citizen member Bringing it all together: implications for Phase 2 18 Jonathan Harker, City of Gresham Where we are headed in Phase 2 19 Eric Hesse, TriMet Jon Holan, City of Forest Grove Phase 1: Supplemental Information Katherine Kelly, City of Gresham Nancy Kraushaar, City of Oregon City Phase 1: 2010 base year and alternative scenario inputs 22 Alan Lehto, TriMet Our starting point is the Reference Case — current plans and policies 24 Mary Kyle McCurdy, 1000 Friends of Oregon Community Design — what we tested 26 Mike McKillip, City of Tualatin Community Design — considerations moving forward 27 Margaret Middleton, City of Beaverton Pricing — what we tested 28 Dan Rutzick, City of Hillsboro Pricing — considerations moving forward 29 Tyler Ryerson, City of Beaverton Lainie Smith, Oregon Department of Transportation Marketing and incentives —what we tested 30 Marketing and incentives — considerations moving forward 31 Metro Staff Roads — what we tested 32 Janna Allgood, Communications Kim Ellis, Planning and Development Roads — considerations moving forward 33 Mike Hoglund, Research Center Fleet and technology — what we tested 34 Nuin -Tara Key, Research Center Fleet and technology — considerations moving forward 35 Tom Kloster, Planning and Development Phase 1 at a glance: results from selected scenarios 36 Janice Larson, Communications Glossary 38 John Mermin, Planning and Development Josh Naramore, Planning and Development For more information, visit www. oregonmetro .gov /climatescenarios Dylan Rivera, Communications Patty Unfred, Communications The following pages summarize the purpose, scope and key findings from Phase 1 of the Climate Ray Valone, Planning and Development Smart Communities Scenarios Project. The region's decision - makers will use this information to direct Dennis Yee, Research Center development of alternative scenarios in Phase 2. Design Support This information is for research purposes only and does not necessarily reflect current or future policy Jeanne Galick, Graphic Designer decisions of the Metro Council, MPAC or JPACT. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 3 Executive summary • Over the years, the diverse communities of the Portland metro- To guide Metro's scenario planning work, the Land Conserva- Vibrant politan region have taken a collaborative approach to planning tion and Development Commission (LCDC) adopted, in May communities Regional and investment that has helped make our region one of the most 2011, the Metropolitan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Equity dileaucharpe y the re leadership li in the country. We have set th on a wise course - Rule, OAR 660-044, also required by section 37. The rule iden- region c1 ui a ak ea 9 but times are challenging. A faltering economy, troubling jobless tifies GHG emissions reduction targets for each of Oregon's six place rates, rising energy, housing and transportation costs, climate metropolitan areas. The targets identify the percentage reduc- clean air Aansportation and water choices change and other challenges demand continued leadership, inno- tion in per capita emissions from light vehicle travel that Economic vation and collaboration to ensure this region remains a great is needed to help Oregon meet its GHG emissions reduction pnisperity place to live, work and play. goals. In 2005, the region's roadway GHG emissions were 4.05 MT CO per capita. The adopted target for the region is the The region's six desired out Joining other states around the country, Oregon has been a equivalent of 1.2 MT CO,e per capita by 2035. LCDC will comes - endorsed by city and county elected officials and leader in addressing climate change with ambitious goals to review the state targets in 2015 and may identify adjustments in adopted by the Metro Coun reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from all sources to 75 light of new information available at that time. cil in December 2010. percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050. The Oregon Legis- lature, in 2009, passed the Jobs and Transportation Act (House The Portland metropolitan region is undertaking scenario plan- Bill 2001). Section 37 of the Act requires Metro, the regional ning in three phases as part of the Climate Smart Communi- government of the Portland metropolitan area, to develop ties Scenarios Project to demonstrate climate change leadership two or more alternative land use and transportation scenarios and respond to the Jobs and Transportation Act. The Scenarios designed to accommodate planned population and job growth Project is building on the land use and transportation strate- and reduce GHG emissions from light vehicles. Section 37 also gies contained in the 2040 Growth Concept, the long -range requires Metro to adopt a preferred scenario after public review vision adopted by the region in 1995. Since its adoption, Metro and consultation with local governments, and calls for local and its partners have collaborated to help communities realize governments in the Portland metropolitan region to implement their local aspirations while moving the region toward its goals the adopted scenario. Adoption is anticipated in 2014, but Sec- for making a great place: vibrant communities, economic pros - tion 37 does not define a specific deadline. perity, transportation choices, equity, clean air and water, and regional climate change leadership. Local and regional efforts to implement the 2040 Growth Concept provide a good basis for the GHG scenario planning work required of the region. t The region has completed the first of three phases of the Su- I - narios Project - Understanding Choices. Phase 1 focused on 05174 understanding the region's land use and transportation choices Y ! _ by conducting a review of published research and testing 144 ~' regional scenarios. The analysis demonstrated the GHG emis sions reduction potential of current plans and policies, as well as which combinations of more ambitious land use and transporta- tion strategies are needed to meet the state target. 4 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 The assumptions used in Phase 1 are ambitious and were based f_ f s Phase 1 Scenarios Project Findings on the need to create a starting point to test scenarios. The = .0. region's decision makers will use the Phase 1 research and sub , The work completed to date yielded the following findings: sequent stakeholder engagement to direct development and eval- . jr Finding 1: Current local and regional uation of additional scenarios in Phases 2 and 3. ,. . m i it plans and policies are ambitious and ; " `' if it ' ' provide a strong foundation for meeting 1 2 ^ ; The Scenarios Project will continue to build on the region's long the region's GHG reduction target. tradition of innovation, excellence in urban planning and con - MT CO 2 servation and stewardship of our natural environment. People Finding 2: The reduction target is 5 ' , achievable but will take additional are alread makin personal choices that will help reduce the I region's GHG emissions — they carpool or take transit to work on's pe effort and.new strategic actions. The regir i � � cap and walk to the store when possible. They support investments — Finding 3: Most of the strategies under GHG e that are needed to create climate smart communities — thriving ��`� (., consideration are already being imple target for 2035 downtowns and main streets supported by transit, neighbor- i,' = ' mented to varying degrees in the region hoods with safe and convenient sidewalks and bicycle connec- ..,••441' to achieve the 2040 Growth Concept vision and other tions and proximity to jobs, parks and services, and more fuel - important economic, social and environmental goals. efficient vehicles. Future project phases will likely identify addi- Finding 4: A range of policy choices exists to reduce GHG tional policies and strategies needed to achieve the needed GHG . l� �� " LI 11) emissions; the best approach is a mix of strategies. emissions reductions while meeting other economic, social and r . environmental goals and supporting the individual needs and °` Finding 5: Community design and pricing play a key role in , of communities throughout the region. �- .. 1 N how much and how far people drive each day and provide .,., significant GHG emissions reductions. A those involved in the Scenarios Project recognize that there Finding Fleet, technology and pricing strategies provide are many unknowns. The region will need to be innovative similar significant GHG emissions reductions, but no single and flexible as the work moves forward to respond to and take strategy is enough to meet the region's target. advantage of what is learned in each project phase. This can be achieved but will require strong partnerships and close collabo- Finding 7: Road management and marketing strategies ration with local, regional, and state partners as well as engag- impirove system and vehicle efficiency and reduce vehicle ing a diversity of individual, community and business perspec- travel to provide similar, but modest, GHG emissions tives to help shape the region's preferred strategy. reductions. This report was prepared by Metro staff in consultation with a technical work group, the Transportation Policy Alternatives Committee (TPAC), the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC), the Joint Policy Advisory Com- mittee (JPACT), the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and the Metro Council. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 5 Introduction Making a Great Place Purpose and scope In 2009, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 2001, the Over the years, the diverse communities of the Portland metropolitan region Jobs and Transportation Act.' Section 37 of the JTA directs have taken a collaborative approach to planning and investment that has helped Metro to "develop two or more alternative land use and transportation scenarios" by January 2012 that are designed make our region one of the most livable in the country. We have set the region to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from light -duty on a wise course — but times are challenging. A faltering economy, troubling vehicles. jobless rates, rising energy, housing and transportation costs, climate change and The Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, and this report, respond to HB 2001 and subsequent GHG emissions other challenges demand continued leadership, innovation and collaboration to reduction targets adopted by the Land Conservation and ensure this region remains a great place to live, work and play. Development Commission in May 2011. During Phase 1, more than 140 regional scenarios were tested to learn the GHG emissions reduction potential of current plans and policies, as well as which combinations of more ambitious land use and transportation strategies Technology Community _ - — are needed to meet the design • - state GHG targets. A R--� • review of published Fleet Pricing - research complemented the scenarios analysis. Marketing Roads and - Th is report summarizes incentives lJ • key findings from Phase 1 and implications for future project phases. Metro staff Policy areas tested in Phase 1 conducted the research with the assistance of a technical work group of members from the Transportation Policy Alternatives Committee (TPAC) and the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC), consistent with policy direction from the Joint Policy Advisory Committee (JPACT) and the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC). 'http: / /www.leg. state. or. us /09reg/ measpdf /hb2000.dir /hh2001.en.pdf 6 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Why this work matters Responding to climate change Climate smart strategies can it, by making a great place ', bring many benefits to the - L _ region — including significant More than a decade ago, the region set a course for growth a obi. - savings in fuel costs, less with the adoption of the 2040 Growth Concept. Over the years, time spent in traffic as well Metro and its partners have collaborated to help communities as other benefits to the realize their unique aspirations while moving the region toward environment, public health _ ,,, I and the economy. its goals to make the Portland metropolitan area a great place to I ). w -. live, work and play. - t" w�- Responding to climate change is one of the most pressing issues ' + - of our time. Mounting scientific evidence shows Oregon's cli- 1 mate is changing. Oregon has been a national leader in address- - - ing climate change with ambitious goals to reduce GHG emis- 1 1 - 1 ;, sions. Now its time for regional and local leaders to focus and y +� �, act on the investments and actions needed to collaboratively _; �� p realize local aspirations and sharcd regional goals, as well as -3 .-- , address state climate goals. The Scenarios Project is intended to y — ' , `: do just that. _ Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is important to the health politan area a head start over other cities and regions across the of the region and the planet. The Scenarios Project will demon- country. In this context, the Scenarios Project will consider poli- strate that the region can progress toward the GHG reduction cies, investments and actions needed by 2035 to tackle the cli- Regionalgreenhouse gas goals set by the state within the context of achieving outcomes mate challenge. The Project will show that solutions are at hand emissions sources (2006) of equal importance to residents: a healthy economy; clean air that will turn the challenge of climate change into opportunities 1O% Other passenger 1 %Local freight and water; and access to good jobs, affordable housing, trans- to enhance the region's resilience, prosperity and quality of life, � -01% Transt portation options, nature, trails and recreational opportunities. now and for generations to come. The Scenarios Project is not only addressing climate change For now, the Scenarios Project will focus on developing a ° Project Y g g Project P g as i Materials for the sake of state mandates. Through this effort, the region regional strategy for reducing GHG emissions from cars, small (goods and will build on a long tradition of innovation, excellence in urban trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) — as required by the 2 Energy planning, and conservation and stewardship of our natural envi- Jobs and Transportation Act. Preparation for and adaptation ronment. The bold decisions made decades ago mean we drive to a changing climate will be addressed in future phases and much less than other regions our size — giving Portland metro- through other efforts already underway in the region and state. Source Metro Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 7 I ,,, 1 1 • r - The Metro 2040 Growth Co cept defines the Form of regional r ` } growth and development f the Portland metropolitan region. _- -.,..� The Growth Concept was adopted in December 1995 through - ^ the Region 2040 planning and public Involvement process. This % - concept is intended to provide long-term growth management . n I f• • - • „'r g of the region. ' ,9 - p N i B j H . g T III I he map highlights elements of parallel planning efforts i r t _ including: the 2035 Region& Transportation Plan that outlines I/ y .e , ` investments in multiple modes of transportation, and a commitment to local polities and investments that well help the . d - ■ � yi V �:I region better accommodate growth within is centers, corridors • . .- = 1 F 7 :j e and employment areas T . _. For more mformann these mioatives, visit f � httP+// o ro 9ov /20 ea �. - ' . \ ,: a te. Z. I„ .1. .s m 1111 'bill 11 - - ' ' F . Appr ® - : �° t s s, a IIIIIIIa e o r .. . ; , �. ° � LL ... '¢ 0 41.. .. 4 r 1 � iEY2iiY iftelft„i„.•_,__ _ ! J - .• i i .,..„.1t,_ . A pr, - - 3 • i �I T ♦. lieY • . If .... xi,. .-- ;:: - , . pl yy t L _ w>1e m 4 .{ f..re and \ ' .yl � 1 f ( . i • ■_ w,fo. .% i ® ® • �. � aa. :a ! F I I ,'6`�+. ` , 1 I c4 •_.__. 3 — ft NI I's 2040 Growth Concept Map ' �:£ 4 ¢4< Z • December2011 c ' °.- ' - �_�, - il lt 1111 11110b , tor. i r Central city - r - Existing high cawcity transit _ I ��yq, ` t�o ;)} ' N t - — _ _ - dip Regional center •-s• Planned high capactyfrank ® . ' _ �. - k 1r' is . * t - - - ' !fie e E .I / _ it Town center Proposed high capacity tansit tier l - r Y` ; ,.. i x/ �'�'�.. ' 1 � i ip Employment land Mainline freight I4 _" - t ( t } - - 44 Parks and natural areas --- High speed rail —` 7 g j �' - „ � V Y @ - . - • Neighborhood - - - - Countybountlanes I S''g. .- ' ' s i - - i ! , ' - _._ _ -_ _ Rural reserve • Airports _ 1 \ "� , 1 �� , de Urban reserve • Intercity ail terminal ` + `� ,. , r . ■ . _J • Urban growth boundaries $ Station communities l iiiT__ J•r _- - '. t Neighbor cities Main streets 1 ✓ ,. 41 Areas eHective0l/18 /12 added to the "8' Corridors t — / - - • man DonalOr[ ° _ _ nab. Metro at.ww i 4 1 • � ..1 `r 7, �+,,, -• • Making a great place I � - - - - — I . 1 m 8 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 A collaborative approach Building on community aspirations and the 2040 Growth alternative scenarios, applying the findings from Phase 1 and Concept to achieve state climate goals incorporating strategies identified in local and regional plan- For more information, Adopted in 1995, the 2040 Growth Concept is the region's blue- ning efforts that are underway. This phase will also evaluate visit the project website print for the future, guiding growth and development based on the benefits, impacts, costs and savings associated with differ- at a shared vision to create livable, prosperous and equitable com- ent strategies across environmental, economic and equity goals. www.oregonmetro. munities. The growth concept encourages development in cen- Case studies will be developed to illustrate potential commu- ters, corridors and employment areas to support environmental, nity effects. This phase will result in development of alternative gov /climatescenarios social and economic objectives. scenarios that will be subject to further analysis and review in Phase 3. How we get there The Scenarios Project is a multi -year collaborative effort designed Phase 3 (January 2013 to June 2014) to help communities realize their aspirations for growth and Building the strategy and implementation development and maximize achievement of the region's six In 2013 and 2014, the region will collaboratively build and desired outcomes and state climate goals. select a preferred scenario after public review and consultation with local governments. This phase will define policies, invest - Phase 1 (January to December 2011) ments and actions needed to implement the preferred scenario. Understanding choices by testing policy options This work will also include development of a finance strategy. In 2011, the region used scenario planning and other research Effective implementation of the preferred strategy will likely to understand the choices for meeting the state GHG emissions require the participation and cooperation of government agen- reduction target. The analysis included development of a Strat- cies, the private sector and community organizations. egy Toolbox report synthesizing published research on different strategies in terms of their GHG reduction potential, benefits to communities, synergies, and implementation opportunities and Climate smart communities scenarios project timeline challenges to be addressed in Phase 2. 2011 2012 2013 - 14 In addition, Metro in collaboration with state and local part- Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 ners, developed and analyzed 144 alternative scenarios. The sce- narios will be used to identify potential policy options for poli- cymakers to discuss during 2012. The regional policy discussion Understanding Shaping Building will shape potential strategies recommended for further evalua- choices the direction the strategy tion in Phase 2. I Jan 2012 Fall 2012 2013 June 2014 Phase 2 (January to December 2012) Accept Direction on Release hybrid Adopt preferred Shaping the direction by turning policy options findings alternative alternative strategy; into a draft regional strategy 1 b scenarios o scenario begin be testt d implementation In 2012, the region will design and evaluate more customized We are here Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 9 Oregon joins other states, regions and communities to lead the way States with adopted For years, states and metropolitan regions have been taking 2007 West Coast MPOs climate action plans action to address climate change in the absence of federal legis- $imilar to many other states, the lation. A wide range of policies have been adopted at the state Oregon Legislature established Seattle ��ai; ,fit1 and regional levels to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, develop statewide GHG emissions reduc- tri clean energy resources and promote more energy- efficient vehi- tion goals in 2007. The goals apply �� " cles, buildings and appliances. More information on these to all emission sectors — energy pro - s efforts can be found at www.c2es.org. duction, buildings, solid waste and Portland transportation — and direct Oregon In progress "°" °'°`e° Although climate change will ultimately require national and to: Source: Center for Climate & Energy Solutions international responses, the actions taken by states and regions • stop increases in GHG emissions will continue to play an important role by developing and test- by 2010 States with adopted GHG ing innovative solutions, demonstrating successful programs, emissions reduction targets and laying the groundwork for broader action. • reduce GHG emissions to 10 per - 411,1111111t cent below 1990 levels by 2020 M �t; 'At Many states have completed or are in the process of revising • reduce GHG emissions to at least '� ��S Sacramento �� or developing comprehensive Climate Action Plans. They view 75 percent below 1990levels by Vita 1 San Francisco 7 �1111� policies that address climate change as an economic opportu- 2050. nity, not as a burden on commerce. These states are trying to The 2007 Oregon Legislature also ''-c. position themselves as leaders in new markets related to cli- established the Oregon Global Source: Center for Climate & Energy Solutions mate action: producing and selling alternative fuels, ramping up Warming Commission (OGWC) — renewable energy exports and attracting high -tech business. a 25- member commission charged Los Angeles with helping coordinate state - Economic issues are just one motivator for state policies that wide efforts to reduce greenhouse San o address climate change. Die e. Policies to improve air quality, reduce g g p q y� gas emissions and guide the state traffic congestion and develop domestic, clean energy supplies can toward its climate goals. The com- The largest West Coast metro - all have climate benefits. Thus states are discovering that climate mission was char g P g ed with he in have bee heee n n nn engaged organizations aged in scenario policies often bring about benefits in these other areas as well. the state, local governments, busi- planning and climate action plan - nesses and residents prepare for ning to meet state GHG emissions Like many other states, Washington, Oregon and California the effects of climate change. More reduction targets. have significant state laws on climate change, with specific and information about the OGWC can varied provisions focusing on reducing transportation- related be found at www.keeporegoncool.org / GHG emissions. • • 10 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 ,�.,._ -.' ,a6, ;-.c :. ,a =." ,� x . s ,. _ _. ..__ , z _ :.. .t.. z _ 4 r _.,, ,a r• ° ",,q ,-`tip. 2009 and livelihoods, and to the environmental values we hold dear in The Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 2001, directing this state. Metro to "develop two or more alternative land use and trans- • • • portation scenarios" by January 2012 that are designed to 2011 _ reduce GHG emissions from light -duty vehicles. The legislation The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the 3 also mandates: Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) 1) adoption of a preferred scenario after public review and con- are leading the state response relative to the transportation sec- N sultation with local government tor through the Oregon Sustainable Transportation Initiative , 2) local government implementation through comprehensive (OSTI). As part of this effort, the Land Conservation and Devel- plans and land use regulations that are consistent with the opment Commission (LCDC) adopted per capita roadway GHG adopted regional scenario. emissions reduction targets for light -duty vehicles for all six met- ropolitan areas within Oregon on May 19, 2011. 2010 In 2010, the OGWC developed an Interim Roadmap to 2020 While there is no legislative direction to reduce GHG emissions that includes recommendations in all sectors of the state's econ- beyond the transportation sector, the Interim Roadmap to 2020 omy — energy, transportation and land use, materials manage- and other state efforts provide a comprehensive framework and ment, forestry, agriculture, and industrial use — to meet state starting point for considering how best to address climate change climate goals. in Oregon. The first Oregon- specific assessment of climate change impacts was released by the Oregon Climate Change Research Insti- ® 2035 GHG targets tute ( OCCRI) in December 2010. The OCCRI Oregon Climate for Oregon metropolitan areas Assessment Report is the work of over 100 researchers across per capita light vehicle GHG emissions reduction the Oregon University System with input from the OGWC. The w „- Metropolitan area Adopted target' report documents likely impacts to Oregon's weather patterns, Portland Metro 20% water supplies, agricultural production, forest health, fish and wildlife species and ecosystems, public health, transportation Oregon Salem 17% infrastructure and coastal communities. Corvallis 21% Eugene - Springfield' 20% In addition, state agencies collaborated with the OGWC, the OCCRI and each other to produce the first comprehensive Bend 18% Oregon policy framework for climate change adaptation plan- Rogue Valley 19% ning in December 2010. The Oregon Climate Change Adapta ' Adopted by the Land Conservation and Development tion Framework identifies near term, low cost and high benefit California Commission in May 2011 • 45 - minut travelshed extent 2 Required scenario planning and adoption actions Oregon can take. These actions will help Oregonians • MPO boundary Required scenario planning minimize the impacts of climate change to their communities 1 http: / /www.oregon.gov/ LCD / dots /rulemaking /trac /660_044.pdf Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 11 The challenge for our region . MIN slIMID h - r. While the overall state GHG emissions reduction goals call for The region's 20 percent per capita reduction is anticipated to '' reductions from 1990 emissions levels by 2050, state agencies come from a combination of community design, pricing, mar- -...' 1 • were tasked with estimating a 2005 baseline and an intermedi- keting /incentives and road policies. If the fleet and technology MT CO e ate GHG emissions reduction goal for the year 2035 to inform improvements assumed in OAR 660 -044 are not achieved, then 2 the Scenarios Project. greater reductions may be needed through these other policies. - t LCDC will review the state targets in 2015 and may identify The region's per capita road LCDC adopted the Metropolitan Greenhouse Gas Reduction adjustments at that time in light of new information available at way GHG emissions target Targets Rule (OAR 660 -044) in May 2011.' The rule identifies that time. for 2035 GHG emissions reduction targets for Oregon's six metropoli- MT CO stands for metric tan areas: The targets identify the percentage reduction in GHG Region's 2035 GHG emissions reduction target ton of carbon dioxide emissions from light vehicle travel that is needed to help Oregon in per capita terms equivalent. meet its long -term goal of reducing GHG emissions to 75 per - Measured and stored at cent below 1990 levels by the year 2050. standard atmospheric pres- sures, one metric ton of CO, • occupies a cube approxi The LCDC target - setting process assumed changes to the vehi- mately the size of a 3 - story cle fleet mix, improved fuel economy, and the use of improved building (27 x 27 x 27 feet). vehicle technologies and fuels that would reduce 2005 emissions It is equivalent to 112 gallons levels from 4.05 to 1.51 MT CO capita by the year 2035. of gasoline. 2 per er ca p y y Fleet and technology = 1.5 MT CO f —_ :1 �- The adopted target for the Portland metropolitan area calls Region's target = — _ _ Community design for 20 percent per capita reduction in GHG emissions from 2035 1.2 MT CO2e 20% reduction z light vehicle travel by the year 2035. This target reduction is Pricing • Marketing & incentives in addition to the reduction expected from changes to the fleet Roads EWA and technology sectors as identified in the Agencies' Technical t Report. Therefore, to meet the target, per capita roadway GHG 2050 emissions must be reduced by an additional 20 percent below The adopted target for the region is the equivalent of 1.2 MT CO per the 1.51 MT CO per capita by the year 2035 — to 1.2 MT capita. While the target is based on 2005 emissions values, it has been CO per capita. calibrated to 1990 emissions levels, and if achieved by the year 2035 ensures the region is on track to meet the overall state 2050 GHG emissions reduction goal. ' http: / /www.oregon.gov/ LCD /docs /rulemaking /trac /660_044.pdf 2 See Agencies' Technical Report at http: / /www.oregon.gov /ODOT /TD/ TP /docs /OSTI /TechRpt.pdf. 12 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Principles to guide our approach Regional and local leaders agree that the Portland region must provide leadership in addressing climate change. The Scenarios Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project guiding principles Project supports this goal by supplementing state actions with a 1. Focus on outcomes and benefits collaborative regional effort that will also advance local aspira- The strategies that are needed to reduce GHG tions and the implementation of the 2040 Growth Concept. In emissions can help save individuals, local Vibrant this spirit, the Metro Council and the region's transportation communities and the private sector mone row and land use policy committees agreed upon six principles to g p y' g Regional p y ' g p local businesses, create jobs and build healthy, Equity climate change guide this scenario planning effort. livable communities. These multiple benefits should Making leadership be emphasized and central to the evaluation and a great Phase 1 of the Scenarios Project focused on understanding the communication of the results. place region's choices for reducing light vehicle GHG emissions. Test - Clean air Transportation ing broad - level, regional scenarios revealed the potential of cur- 2. Build on existing efforts and aspirations and water choices rent plans and policies as well as what combinations of land use Start with existing local and regional plans that Economic include strategies to achieve the six desired outcomes prosperity and transportation strategies (grouped under six policy areas) g are needed to meet the state GHG targets. for a successful region, illustrated at right. The region's six desired outcomes - 3. Show cause and effect endorsed by city and county elected Provide sufficient clarity to discern cause and effect officials and adopted by the Metro — —.._ relationships between strategies tested. Council in December 2010. 4. Be bold, yet plausible and well - grounded 1 A 1 ~ ` Explore a range of futures that may be difficult to achieve but are possible in terms of ,4J,, _* ! market feasibility, public acceptance and consistency with local aspirations. • -_ :" -- - 5. Be fact -based and make information relevant, understandable and tangible ni - now -- - _ Develop and organize information so decision - makers and stakeholders can understand ,,:- 1 "—# r the choices, consequences (intended and unintended) and tradeoffs. Use case studies, -.f , .. " 1 1 1 visualization and illustration tools to communicate results and make the choices real. A.N.--It - kb �» - , 6. Meet state climate goals • _. , ,, . .. " �a a , Demonstrate what is required to meet the state GHG emissions reduction target for ". r' SUM cars, small trucks and SUVs, recognizing reductions from other emissions sources must !my 13: - . _ also be addressed in a comprehensive manner. .� . �. , ... 4' - :. ~ The Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and the Joint Policy Advisory Committee Successful centers like downtown Hillsboro are dynamic, walkable places on Transportation (JPACT) endorsed the six principles on June 8 and June 9, 2011 that have a concentration of businesses, shops and entertainment, and respectively, to guide all Scenarios Project phases. strong transit service. They combine offices, retail and housing with quality streetscapes, parks and plazas, fountains or other urban amenities. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 13 Phase 1: methods and tools In May 2011, a work group of members from TPAC and MTAC The Reference Case assumes the realization of existing plans was charged with helping Metro staff develop the Phase 1 sce- and policies, and represents the Level 1 assumptions for each M iiiii M IN evaluation assumptions, consistent with the guiding principles and policy area. The remaining 143 scenarios test plausible com- MI IN evaluation framework endorsed by the Metro Council, JPACT binations of land use and transportation strategies that could MI and MPAC in June 2011. affect GHG emissions from light -duty vehicles. iM Strategy Toolbox The technical work group defined the scenario assumptions to Strategies were organized into six policy areas: „ a be tested while Metro and ODOT staff developed tools to sup- • Community design port the analysis in summer 2011. The model development work . Prcing K.. concluded in September 2011, and the initial model runs were 0 !Nerr° l Making a great place completed in October. • Marketing and incentives • Roads — Metro staff used a regionally tailored version of ODOT's • Fleet __ Greenhouse Gas State Transportation Emissions Planning • tailored v WWW (GreenSTEP) model to conduct the analysis. Using GreenSTEP Phase 1 — the same model used to set the region's GHG emissions reduc- Each of these policy areas include individual strategies that have Metropolitan GreenSTEP Scenarios Technical tion target — ensures compatibility with state's planning efforts been shown to affect GHG emissions (see page 15). While some Documeenntatiyo .7 — __ and provides a common GHG emissions reporting tool across strategies are new, many of the strategies tested are already being the state. MAROry 71512 implemented to varying degrees to realize the 2040 Growth Concept and the aspirations of communities across the region. A The U.S. Department of Transportation has made GreenSTEP summary of the strategies tested is provided on pages 22 to 35. available to other states and regions as part of the Energy and al Melo l AWAinga great place Emissions Reduction Policy Analysis Tool (EERPAT). EERPAT Including the Reference Case, a total of 144 scenarios have been was developed to assist with analyzing greenhouse gas reduc- analyzed at a preliminary level for their GHG emissions reduc- tion scenarios and alternatives for use in the transportation tion potential. In addition to the scenarios analysis, staff com- planning process, scenario planning efforts and to measure the pleted the Strategy Toolbox report. The Strategy Toolbox report reduction potential of various transportation strategies to meet summarizes published local, national and international research state greenhouse gas reduction goals and targets. The Tool uses on strategies that can help reduce transportation - related GHG GreenSTEP, developed by the Oregon State DOT, as its founda- emissions and meet other policy objectives. The report docu- tion, and is expected to have regular enhancements.' ments benefits of different strategies to a community, synergies between strategies, and implementation opportunities and chal- The foundation of this work is the development of a Base Case — lenges to be addressed in Phase 2. the existing conditions for 2010 — and a Reference Case — a fore- cast of how the region will perform in 2035 based on projected Key findings from Phase 1 will be used to refine scenario inputs population and demographic trends. to develop customized alternative scenarios for further analyses in Phase 2 and Phase 3. 1 http: / /www.planning.dot.gov /FHWA_tool 14 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Phase 1: building blocks for regional scenarios Putting stakes in the ground to create a Testing combinations of plausible strategies starting point A • The assumptions used Phase 1 are ambitious and were LEVEL based on the need to cre- 3 0 0 ate a starting point to test _ scenarios. Each level of effort MOST AMBITIOUS tests different implementa- +, tion levels for each of the - policy areas. E LEVEL r, , -- ro 2 ,' s In Phase 2, the level of imple- ,., G mentation of these strategies as well as their timing and H MO RE AMBITIOUS sequencing will be explored - — - - - and further refined to devel- w LEVEL op alternative scenarios that 1 will be subject to analysis and further review in Phase 3. CURRENT POLICIES Community . ,, Policy areas design I centives Roads Fleet Technology r . -fi Strategies tested II Community design: Complete neighborhoods and mixed -use areas, urban growth boundary, transit service, bike travel, parking - .. A • Pricing: Pay -as- you -drive insurance, gas tax, road use fee, carbon fee ■•Mlif 4 IL i • Marketing and incentives: Eco- driving, individualized marketing programs, employer commute programs, car - sharing - Roads: Freeway and arterial capacity, traffic management • Fleet: Fleet mix and age • Technology: Fuel economy, carbon intensity of fuels, electric and plug -in hybrid electric vehicle market share Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 15 Phase 1: findings Phase 1 of the Scenarios Project has focused on understanding What we learned from the Phase 1 Scenarios the region's choices by conducting a review of published The work completed to date yielded the following findings: 1 .2 research and testing 144 regional scenarios. Phase 1 was MT CO 2 e designed to accomplish two things: 1) to understand the GHG Overall findings emissions reduction potential of current plans and policies and Finding 1: Current local and regional plans and policies are 2) to understand the combinations of plausible land use and ambitious and provide a strong foundation for meeting the The region's per capita transportation strategies that reduce GHG emissions from light region's GHG target. If realized, they will result in substantial roadway GHG emissions duty vehicles to 1.2 MT CO per capita by 2035. The region's per capita GHG emissions reductions from 2005 levels. How - target for 2035 decision - makers will use this information to direct development P ever, a continued shift in consumer preferences and significant of alternative scenarios in Phase 2. investment, commitment and leadership are needed to realize these aspirations. Current plans and policies Finding 2: The reduction target is achievable but will take provide a strong foundation but do not meet target additional effort and new strategic actions. Ninety -three • of 144 scenarios tested meet the 20 percent per capita GHG 0 3 3 1.2 emissions reduction target. Various combinations of policies MT CO E achieved GHG emissions reductions ranging from 20 percent to r 2 2 _ 2 2 53 percent below 2005 levels. 0 4) ' 1 . 8 Finding 3: Most of the strategies under consideration are J MT COe Community Pricing Marketing/ Roads Fleet Technology already being implemented to varying degrees in the design incentives region to achieve the 2040 Growth Concept vision and Policy areas other important economic, social and environmental goals. Driving less conserves energy, reduces fuel consumption and keeps money in the region that consumers and businesses can Targets are achievable spend on other things to help stimulate the region's economy. but will take additional effort and new strategic actions Supporting investments such as bike lanes, sidewalks, new 0 3 3 . MT CO transit service, and electric vehicle charging stations will help d (53% below 2005) expand travel options for everyone. E 2 2 2 2 ■ 2 2 .91 MT CO o (40% below 2005) Finding 4: A range of policy choices exists to reduce GHG N y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.2 MT CO2e emissions; the best approach is a mix of strategies. Light - (20% below 2005) duty vehicle emissions are a function of vehicle efficiency, tech - Community Pricing Marketing/ Roads Fleet Technology design incentives nology, fuel content and vehicle travel. While improving vehicle Policy areas and fuel efficiency achieves significant reductions in GHG emis- sions, per capita vehicle travel must be reduced to meet the target. 16 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Comparison of Phase 1 policy areas Policy area findings Estimated reductions in roadway GHG emissions Finding 5: Community design and pricing play a key role in _.,. from current plans and policies how much and how far people drive each day and provide - . Estimated percent significant GHG emissions reductions The analysis reveal f , reduction from that community design or pricing strategies must be more ambi -3 Policy area Level 1.8 MTCO 2 e * tious than current policies to meet the target. However, pricing and community design together yield the largest GHG emissions Community design 4 18% reduction per capita. Community design 36 %; Pricin a M " ` 13 Finding 6: Fleet, technology and pricing strategies provide a - ' lc �I g ;. , similar significant GHG emissions reductions but no single d 1 Pricing 14% strategy is enough to meet the region's target. Pricing, -'4-:',:::: { 4% when combined with the most ambitious fleet and technology ' Marketing and incentives a - strategies, meets the target. Roads 2 2% .1M1 Fleet 2 11% Finding 7: Road management and marketing strategies .. I improve system and vehicle efficiency and reduce vehicle Technology 2 14% travel to provide similar, but modest GHG emissions reduc- ' _ .. *MT CO percent change from 2035 Reference Case (current plans and policies) tions. Combining these strategies with community design pro- '� ' : - — vides additional emissions reduction that can help meet the r 4' ' _ , - The analysis used the Metropolitan GreenStep model to test six different region's GHG target. - y policy areas and their ability to reduce light vehicle GHG emissions. The table above demonstrates the effect of applying each policy area at each level of implementation beyond the Reference Case (Level 1). The estimated percent reduction represents the average reduction in roadway GHG emissions for each policy area, while considering all possible combinations of policy areas. It should be noted that these reduction estimates do NOT assess the relative effect of changes to individual strategies, but rather the reductions attrib- utable to each policy area. In addition, the reduction estimates are NOT additive. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 17 Bringing it all together: implications for Phase 2 The results reflect the underlying model assumptions used _ _ • � ' in Phase 1 Scenarios analysis, and provide a starting point • no com design igni ons used Phase are ambitious for Phase 2. The assumptions in Ph 1 biti p _ i i kt if.00.p t and were based on the need to create a starting point to test A irlir pric scenarios. The assumptions and scenarios tested do not repre- - sent specific policy decisions of the Metro Council, MPAC or ase Scenarios were intended to show whether ' -- • a rr ! JPACT. The Phase 1 Si ided hheth Marketin s , Ilk q �� Roads and it is possible for the region to reduce GHG emissions enough to �I incentives p g g r i ` 1 meet the region's target. During Phase 2, the level of implemen tation of these strategies as well as their timing and sequenc- • _ ' i.. 'f` - 1 �_ ms ing will be explored and further refined to develop alternative ., – s, --- . scenarios that will be subject to further analysis and review in - - ".: P ' ' Phase 3. also be important for Metro and local governments to integrate Each strategy presents its own opportunities and chal- GHG scenario planning with existing Metro, county and city lenges. The cost, level of effort and type of actions needed planning processes. will vary by policy and strategy. The process of defining a pre- ferred approach must be inclusive and engage stakeholders from Leadership, partnerships and coordination are keys to suc- diverse backgrounds to allow for a variety of perspectives to cess. Strategies under consideration have a mix of "sponsors" be shared and considered. Effects on the economy, equity, the and funding sources. Metro and local governments cannot environment, costs, savings, public acceptance, and actions achieve the targets alone; it will take leadership, collaboration needed to implement a particular strategy must be considered. and coordinated action at the local, regional, state and federal levels. New governance structures and funding mechanisms Existing governance structures require that scenario plan- may be needed to implement the strategies. ning be a collaborative effort between the state, Metro, cities and counties. While Metro is responsible for coordinat- Selecting strategies will involve policy decisions that could ing regional land use and transportation planning and imple- have political, economic, environmental, equity, commu- mentation, scenario planning involves evaluation of policies and nity and lifestyle implications. By framing the policy choices strategies that are the responsibility of all levels of government. that decision- makers will consider throughout the process, A collaborative planning and decision- making model allows Phase 1 research serves as a basis for continuing a regional dia- agreement to be reached at each level. logue on how best to reach our GHG reduction target while advancing local and regional efforts to build livable, prosper - Metro, cities, counties and the state will need to be ous and equitable communities. The region's approach must flexible and innovative to be successful. Existing staff are also advance realization of the region's six desired outcomes, fully subscribed with current planning responsibilities. Addi- and support the individual needs and aspirations of each com- tional financial and technical support will be needed. It will munity in the region. 18 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Where we are headed in Phase 2 The primary objective of the Phase 1 analysis is to estimate the walks, and bicycle facilities, or households of modest means GHG emissions reduction potential of current policies and that that may lack access to lower carbon vehicle options or afford- ' `` of alternative combinations of strategies. Phase 2 (January to able housing options. December 2012) will build on this work and consider: ° , Cost effectiveness: Cost - effectiveness will be important in the Moving forward: selection and implementation of GHG emissions reduction strat- --4.:: - , .t.:;,. egies. Further research is needed to estimate cost - effectiveness, policy questions to be addressed including accounting for the benefits and cost impacts of differ- Together, we must answer pivotal policy questions to iden- kfi. Yuiii: ; �. ent strategies. The evaluation will consider the costs and bene- tify the right mix of land use and transportation investments _r,_ - fits across environmental, economic and equity goals from mul- and strategies: tiple perspectives - business, individual, household, community ' A.:. A.:. ' �'' ._ • Which actions are local and regional leaders currently tak- •- ; ' t , _, ; and region. The evaluation will illustrate the political, commu- _ ,- _ , _ : ing and which of the possible new actions are most con- - nity, social equity and economic implications of different strat- 7,--- _ egies, as well as public and private costs and savings and the sistent with existing efforts? y °`' potential costs of inaction. • Which strategies are most cost - effective and efficient? Which strategies are easiest to implement, both techni- Fiscal considerations: The evaluation will assess how rev- tally and politically? How do we overcome obstacles to • enues generated from parking management and other strate- the most effective actions that are difficult or expensive to implement? `" ! no'}, ,'1- gies could be funding sources for community investments, such p °- as expanded transit service, implementing system and demand • What are the benefits and impacts of these strategies to management programs, building sidewalks, fixing bottlenecks I individuals, businesses, the region's economy and other and providing electric vehicle infrastructure. desired outcomes communities and the region are trying to achieve? Economic considerations: The feasibility of implementing dif .How do we ensure the region's strategy is inclusive and • ferent strategies, potential financing strategies and the time- equitable, reflects the diversity of needs and interests in frame required will be assessed to inform next steps and recom- the region and does not perpetuate disparities or leave mendations. Recommended solutions should not put the state, any community behind, especially households of modest region or local governments at an economic disadvantage, but means and people of color? rather boost economic competitiveness and provide greater eco- nomic opportunity for everyone. • How do we ensure the region's strategy creates good jobs, provides greater economic opportunity for everyone .. Equity. considerations: The evaluation will meaningfully con- and boosts economic development and competitiveness? sider equity. This should include assessing the impacts to com- munities without well- connected street systems, transit, side Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 19 Other local and regional climate initiatives Local climate initiatives • The City of Beaverton has conducted GHG inventories for its tali CITY OFHILLSBORO operations and the community. Beaverton is now finalizing susraNABIUTY PLAN Communities around the Portland metropolitan region are already taking steps to address climate change. its Sustainability Strategy with goals that support the regional --. and state objectives. • In 2006, the City of West Linn developed a strategic plan that recommends specific actions to achieve sustainability, includ- ing reducing GHG emissions. Regional climate activities ' ' "` • The cities of Beaverton, Forest Grove, Gladstone, Gresham, The Scenarios Project is one element of a larger set of Hillsboro, Lake Oswego, Milwaukie, Oregon City, and Port - g > g Y� climate- related initiatives at Metro collectively known as land, which together currently represent 66 percent of the Climate Smart Communities: region's population, committed to reducing greenhouse gas Too emissions as a signatory to the 2007 U.S. Conference of May- Regional Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: In 2010, < ors Climate Protection Agreement. Metro completed a regional GHG emissions inventory for the M year 2006. The inventory establishes a snapshot of the region's o • In 2008, the Clackamas County developed an action plan carbon footprint to focus planning and monitoring efforts to that calls for reductions in GHG emissions and specific achieve long-term GHG reductions. Program ""'°"°"' inablhty actions to support meeting the plan's reduction goals. g Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment Toolkit: Metro • In 2008, Washington County completed an inventory of developed a regional GHG Emissions Assessment Toolkit that GHG emissions from agency operations. establishes a framework for regional climate impact assess- r. ' v'. ,lreeaelon 0.1311faT °'''', • In 2009, the City of Portland and Multnomah County ments and provides consistent guidance on analysis methods, adopted a Climate Action Plan to guide policies and programs reporting, and evaluation of Metro projects, programs and --, . to achieve reductions in GHG emissions. The plan builds on policies. s. 4 previous plans adopted in 1993 and 2001. Climate Leadership Initiative: Metro participated in the Cli- ' r- -- _'; =' • In 2010, the City of Hillsboro completed an inventory of mate Leadership Initiative, completed in January 2010, which GHG emissions from local government operations. The inven- engaged local experts and stakeholders on how to prepare the tory provides a baseline for tracking reductions in GHG emis- lower Willamette Valley River Basin for climate change impacts. Sustainable Beaverton Strategy sions called for in the city's 2010 Sustainability Plan. Climate Prosperity Strategy: Metro worked with local gov- • In 2011, the City of Gresham prepared a sustainability plan ernments, businesses, educational institutions, and the Port- for the city's operations and facilities that includes specific land Oregon Sustainability Institute to develop the 2011 Port- , , - , ,-..•,1 goals for reducing GHG emissions. land Metro Climate Prosperity Strategy — a "greenprint" for • The City of Lake Oswego is developing a community -based integrating climate change policy and economic development . Y ' ! . GHG inventory. The inventory will rovide a baseline for L— into a single strategy. �� ' y P -,_ ,L. � . tracking reductions in GHG emissions from all sources and is ' a component of the city's comprehensive plan update. 20 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 a i' i lily" _ - -___,.... 7 7 14 :11... , i , , . , .. ,,,,. 4 ,_ ... ,_ iv_ 0 ,, r ,o, 1 , , , ..,„,. _.... lac, i 1_, 1 7 -_,...r.---ro 43 ! '" l6 ! t Iii ' .. _ ..:, - ... " - "' -67 - - - : 1-1111111e e 41i a --- ziocar.com Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project Ph ase 1: S uppl ementa I nformation Phase 1: 2010 base year and alternative scenario inputs The input assumptions This table summarizes the inputs for the 2010 Base Year and in the Phase 1 Metropolitan GreenSTEP Scenarios Technical are for research purposes 1 144 alternative scenarios that reflect different levels of Documentation report (January 2012). This information is for only and do not neces- 1 implementation for each category of policies. The inputs were research purposes only and does not necessarily reflect current sarily reflect current or developed by Metro staff in consultation with a technical or future policy decisions of the Metro Council, MPAC or future policy decisions of the Metro Council, MPAC work group of MTAC and TPAC members. Documentation JPACT. or JPACT. of the inputs and rationale behind each input can be found Reference case 2010 2035 Base Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects more Reflects even more Strategy conditions and policies ambitious policy changes ambitious policy changes Households living in mixed -use areas and GreenSTEP calculates complete neighborhoods (percent) c •, Urban growth boundary expansion (acres) 2010 UGB 7,680 acres 7,680 acres No expansion CD > , Bicycle mode share' (percent) 2% 2% 12.5% 30% :C 3 Transit service level 2010 service level 2035 RTP service level 2.5 times RTP service level 4 times RTP service level O C Workers /non -work trips paying for parking 13% / 8% 13% / 8% 30% / 30% 30% / 30% o (percent) Average daily parking fee ($2005) $5.00 $5.00 $5.00 $7.25 Pay -as- you -drive insurance (percent of 0% 0% 100% at $0.06 /mile households participating and cost) al No change • c Gas tax (cost per gallon $2005) $0.42 $0.48 $0.18 from Level 2 V •C a Road use fee (cost per mile $2005) $0 $0 $0.03 Carbon emissions fee (cost per ton) $0 $0 $0 $50 ' Percent of all tours less than 6 miles roundtrip. 22 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 2010 2035 Base Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects more Reflects even more Strategy conditions and policies ambitious policy changes ambitious policy changes vi Households participating in eco- driving 0% 0% 40% a, c Households participating in individualized 9% 9% 65% w marketing programs (percent) :o Workers participating in employer -based 20% 20% 40% c commuter programs (percent) c Car - sharing in high density areas (target Participation rate of Participation rate of Double participation to participation rate) 1 member /100 people 1 member /100 people 2 members /100 people ` Car - sharing in medium density areas Participation rate of Participation rate of Double participation to 2 (target participation rate) 1 member /200 people 1 member /200 people 2 members /200 people No Level 3 Freeway and arterial expansion 2010 system 2035 financially constrained No expansion system c Delay reduced by traffic management 10% 10% 35% strategies (percent) Fleet mix (proportion of autos to light auto: 57% auto: 56% auto: 71% cu trucks and SUVs) light truck /SUV: 43% light truck /SUV: 44% light truck /SUV: 29% u . Fleet turnover rate (age) 10 years 10 years 8 years Fuel economy (miles per gallon) auto: 29.2 mpg auto: 59.7 mpg auto: 68.5 mpg 4 light truck /SUV: 20.9 mpg light truck /SUV: 41 mpg light truck /SUV: 47.7 mpg El Carbon intensity of fuels 90 g CO /megajoule 81 g CO /megajoule 72 g CO /megajoule H Light -duty vehicles that are electric or auto: 0% auto: 4% auto: 8% plug -in electric vehicles (percent) light truck /SUV: 0% light truck /SUV: 1% light truck /SUV: 2% Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 23 Our starting point is the Reference Case - current plans and policies A Key population and household assumptions • Locations with paid parking are limited to downtown Port- - • Between the years 2010 and 2035, the population within land, the Oregon Health Science University campus and the the Metro urban growth boundary is forecast to increase Lloyd District, representing approximately 13 percent of the '41.4 M y by 400,000, growing from 1.4 to 1.8 million residents. This region's workers and 8 percent of other trips made each day — assumption is based on Metro's draft Beta forecast and the same as in 2005. represents the lower end of the middle -third of the population • Zero households participate in pay -as- your -drive insurance. _ growth forecast range. This range value is consistent with F. Metro Council's recent adoption of an ordinance (in October Key marketing and incentives assumptions 2011), which focused its growth management decision on • 9 percent of households participate in individualized market- * J the lower end of the middle -third of the population growth ing — the same as today. forecast range. • 20 percent of workforce participates in employer -based com- • Metropolitan GreenSTEP travel behavior estimates are made mute programs — the same as today. irrespective of housing choice or supply. Therefore, there is no • Participation in carsharing programs remains the same as �:, assumption about the type of housing assumed to be built in today: one member for every 100 people in higher- density �'''� ' ` the future. areas like the Pearl District in Portland and one member for .s , " • The following housing supply growth characteristics are every 200 people in medium - density areas like inner eastside r1 presented for context purposes only. Recently, approximately Portland neighborhoods. iii . 40 percent of new housing units constructed in the region -", are multi- family (MF), and 60 percent is single- family (SF). Key fleet and technology assumptions The draft Beta forecast reflected a marginal growth split • The region's fleet mix stays nearly the same as today — of 78 percent MF and 22 percent SF by 2035, which would 56 percent of the fleet is passenger cars and the remaining 44 result in a total housing stock split of 34 percent MF and 66 percent is small trucks and sport utility vehicles. percent SF by 2035. However, Metro in coordination with • The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (as proposed by the Oregon regional partners, have refined these assumptions resulting in Department of Environmental Quality) is adopted; carbon a draft Gamma forecast. The Gamma forecast demonstrates intensity of fuels will decline by 10 percent below today's that over the next 25 years approximately 59 percent of new average. housing units in the region will be MF, and 41 percent will be • Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards SF. This growth split results in a total housing stock split of calling for a fleet average of 50 miles per gallon for model 35 percent MF and 65 percent SF. years 2017 -2025 are achieved. This fleet average represents a fuel economy of 59.7 mpg for passenger cars and 41 mpg for Key pricing assumptions light- trucks. • The federal gas tax is 18 cents per gallon — the same as today. • Electric vehicles and plug -in hybrid electric vehicles represent • State gas tax is 30 cents per gallon — the same as today. 4 percent of the total passenger vehicle fleet and 1 percent of • The average daily cost of parking is $5 per day — the same as the light -truck fleet. in 2005. 24 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Key transportation system assumptions Other multi -modal investments 2035 RTP Funding Sources • • The 2035 Financially - Constrained Regional Transportation • On- street bicycle and pedestrian projects, such as bicycle Plan includes $13.6 billion of investments, reflecting the lanes, cycle tracks, bicycle boulevards, sidewalks and crossing 25% amount of revenue reasonably expected to be available in the improvements are constructed. State 44 Metro region from 2007 to 2035. • Off - street regional trail projects are constructed, such as the 53.4 B Local • The 2035 RTP financial strategy assumes existing federal, Lake Oswego to Portland trail, Fanno Creek (Red Electric) pi , 56 B state and local funding plus new revenues that are not part trail, Beaverton Creek Trail, Westside trail, Tonquin trail, 31% 1 of the Phase 1 modeled pricing assumptions. Significant Columbia Slough trail, Scouter's Mountain trail, E. Buttes Federal 54.2 6 increases in transportation revenue are likely to be needed Loop trail, and the Gresham- Fairview trail. if anticipated improvements in vehicle fuel economy are • New street connections that build out the regional street grid realized. are constructed. Source: 2035 Regional Transporta- tion Plan (approved June 10, 2010) • Freight rail and street extensions and expansions focused on Key road assumptions serving industrial areas are constructed. • The 2035 Regional Transportation Plan financially con- • Major streets are widened or retrofitted with sidewalks, . strained system of highway and investments is implemented. bicycle facilities and other multi -modal designs. • Future delay on the highway and arterial network is reduced by 10 percent through traffic management, such as clearing crashes and breakdowns more quickly, traffic signal timing 2035 RTP by investment type and share of total cost and other strategies. Percent of Investment type Cost total RTP cost Targeted highway investments • I -5 / Columbia River Crossing (CRC) Project is completed. Sidewalks, bike facilities and trails $948 M 7% • Interchanges in the OR 217, US 26, I -205 corridors and at the Freight rail and road access to industrial areas $623 M 5% junction of I- 5/I -84 are improved. • The Sunrise Project connection from 1-205 to 172nd Avenue Traffic management, signal timing and other ITS projects $ 19 M <1 is built. Regional programs $196 M 1% • US 26 West is widened to six through lanes to Cornelius Pass • Regional Travel Options Road. • Regional Transportation System Management and Operations • Regional Transit - Oriented Development Regional transit investments • Milwaukie light rail and Columbia River Crossing light rail Multi -modal roads and bridges $4.3 B 32% are constructed. Highway widening and fixing bottlenecks $4.0 B 29% • Lake Oswego streetcar, Portland streetcar loop, and Public transit $3.5 B 25% Burnside /Couch streetcar to Hollywood Transit Center are constructed. Total (costs have been rounded) $13.6 B 100% • Frequent bus service is expanded in key transit corridors. Source: 2035 Regional Transportation Plan (approved June 10, 2010) Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 25 Community design - what we tested Households living in mixed -use areas: GreenSTEP estimates the 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 in the share of regional probability that a household lives in a mixed -use area or complete bike travel, an estimate consistent with the 2035 RTP. Technology Community de neighborhood based on Census tract population density. In Phase 2035 Level 2 assumes the same share of bicycle travel as Level 3 of 1, GreenSTEP internally calculated the following values: the first round of Statewide Transportation Strategy scenarios. Fleet Priiigg 2010 Base year: 24% - 2035 Level 3 assumes regional bike mode share grows to 30 percent. 2035 Level 1: 33% Marketing 2035 Level 2: 33% Transit service level: Input reflects per capita transit service growth. Roads and incentives 2035 Level 3: 34% 2010 Base Year reflects current TriMet service levels for light -rail, In future project phases these values can be adjusted to reflect land streetcar and bus service growth. This ratio represents the equiva- use policies aimed at changing the amount and type of mixed -use lent of 29 revenue miles per capita. development. 2035 Level 1 assumes the per capita service rate in the 2035 RTP. 2035 Level 2 assumes transit service levels grow significantly — the Urban growth boundary: Input tests the effect of urban growth equivalent of 69 revenue miles per capita, roughly comparable to boundary expansion. the service levels of Chicago and Washington D.C., or 2.5 times 2010 Base Year captures the existing land area with the UGB. the 2035 RTP service level. 2035 Level 1 assumes one - quarter of the adopted urban reserves 2035 Level 3 assumes even more substantial growth, the equivalent areas come into the UGB by 2035. of 115 revenue miles per capita, roughly comparable to New York 2035 Level 2 assumes the same level of expansion as Level 1. City service levels, or 4 times the 2035 RTP service level. 2035 Level 3 tests the effect of a no expansion policy. Workers /non -work trips paying for parking: GreenSTEP con - Bicycle mode share: Input reflects the share of all trips less than 6 siders parking pricing as a trip -based cost. There are two types of miles round trip in length are made by bicycle. parking costs addressed in GreenSTEP: (1) parking costs at places 2010 Base Year reflects the estimated regional bike mode share, as of employment and (2) non -work parking costs. reflected in the 2035 RTP. 2010 Base Ycar reflects the current estimate of areas with work and non -work parking fees — this includes downtown Portland, 2010 2035 OHSU and the Lloyd District. PA.' 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 parking areas. Base Year Le y ' Level 2 • .. ._. Reference w - 2035 Level 2 assumes new areas charge parking fees, based on the Reflects existing Reflects cure s lects more,. _ -n more Strategy conditions w # :: r ■ changes 2035 RTP. This is the only community design input where Level 2 0 Households living in mixed -use areas and GreenSTEP calculates reflects adopted policy, not Level 1. complete neighborhoods (percent) 2035 level 3 assumes no change from Level 2. Urban growth boundary expansion (acres) 2010 UGB 7,680 acres 7,680 acres No expansion Bicycle mode share' (percent) 2% 2% 12.5% 30% Average daily parking fee: Input provides the opportunity to Transit service level 2010 service level 2035 RTP service level 2.5 times RTP service level 4 times RTP service level evaluate the effects of adjusting work and non -work parking fee Workers /non -work trips paying for 13 % /8% 13 %/8% 30 %/30% 30 %/30% amounts (2005 $): 2010 Base Year: $5.00 parking (percent) 2035 Level 1: $5.00 Average daily parking fee ($2005) $5.00 55.00 55.00 $7.25 2035 Level 2: $5.00 ' Percent of all tours less than 6 miles roundtrip. 2035 Level 3: $7.25 26 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Community design = considerations moving forward Strategy lead ations. The result of this work is an innovative model that intro - Community design Federal State Regional Local duces explicit modeling of household size, age, and income to dis Other potential tinguish housing type choice e. single-family benefits from the g Complete neighborhoods gyp (e.g., g y or Strategy Toolbox and mixed - use areas • and willingness to pay in a sketch- planning tool. This Project will provide new tools needed to evaluate changes in housing assump- Community benefits Urban growth boundary • Increased physical activity bons and implications on housing affordability as part of the Transit service • process. Enhanced public safety; Bicycle travel • reduced risk of traffic injuries and fatalities Parkin Market feasibility consumer preferences and infrastruc Parking Improved air quality and tune needs: Research reviewed in the Strategy Toolbox Report fewer air toxics emissions showed growing consumer demand for walkable neighborhoods Most of the community design strategies are focused on changes to and mixed -use development served by transit. The research also Environmental benefits the built environment. With modest UGB expansion from today, a showed that while compact, mixed -use development can reduce Less pollution greater number of residents live in mixed -use areas and "complete public costs and provide benefits, it can be more complicated and Less energy use neighborhoods," thereby making walking, biking, personal elec- have significantly higher upfront costs than traditional single -use Natural areas, farm and tric vehicles, and transit more feasible and likely. Expanding tran- development. Today, individual communities have varying capac- forest protection sit service and managing the supply and cost of parking in targeted ity and desire to support redevelopment of existing areas or new Economic benefits mixed -use areas provide additional GHG reduction benefits. mixed -use development. Investment in transit, street connectivity, Job opportunities sidewalks, bicycle facilities, urban parks and other assets is needed Improved access to jobs, While these strategies combined provide significant GHG emis- to support mixed -use development to result in shorter trips, and goods and services sions, there are a number of implications that have not yet more walking, bicycling and use of transit in a community. Consumer and municipal been assessed. The following are some of the implications to be savings accounted for and further analyzed during Phases 2 and 3: In Phase 2, the Scenarios Project will need to further evalu- Leverage private investment, ate the effectiveness of mixed -use development, parking man- increased local tax revenues Housing supply, capacity and affordability: Metropolitan agement and transit service. Phase 2 will consider the market Increased property values GreenSTEP does not consider any housing supply assumptions and feasibility, investment needs and implications on affordability Reduced fuel consumption travel behavior estimates are made irrespective of housing choice. throughout the region. In addition, more research is needed on The model only considers the demand forecast components — changing consumer preferences in the region to better under - household size, income and age — and does not relate any changes stand how changes in demographics and housing demand may _ in travel behavior to housing preference or existing housing supply. g P g g affect housing need, supply and costs. All of these consider- 4, _ srt • Therefore, there is no Phase 1 assumption about the type of hous- ations influence the timing and sequencing of implementing ing to be built in the future. community design strategies. Thus, the full GHG emissions � ` „ 61 '11 ° i .: AI :a reduction potential of this policy area is constrained to some For Phase 2 of the Scenarios Project, Metro staff is developing degree by local market conditions, consumer preferences, public i � i ; ` a model — compatible with Metropolitan GreenSTEP — that will incentives, financial feasibility, and public acceptance. incorporate housing preference, supply and capacity consider - Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 27 Pricing - what we tested Pay -as -you- drive - insurance Strategy lead ` 2010 13a5e 1 e.1r reflects current program options with no pay- Pricing Federal State Regional Local Technology desig ' as- you -drive insurance options available to consumers. Pay -as- you -drive insurance • e '-- .. ,' ,0 2035 Level 1 assumes no change in program options from 2010. • Fleet 2035 Level 2 reflects a 100 percent transition to pay -as -you- Gas tax • • • drive insurance. This assumption reflects the State's most ambi- Road use fee • • • Roads Marketing .. tious assumption for the first round of STS scenarios. Carbon fee incentives 2035 Level 3 assumes no change from Level 2. Gas tax includes the equivalent of an annual increase of $.01 per year 2010 Base Year reflects the 2010 state and federal gas tax levels. state gas tax increase. The state gas tax increase was assumed in 2035 Level 1 reflects the state gas tax increase resulting from the 2035 RTP strategy to address maintenance and operation of HB 2001. the transportation system. 2035 Level 2 assumes no change in the federal gas tax and 2035 Level 3 assumes no change from Level 2. reflects a shift of the state gas tax to an equivalent road use fee Carbon emissions fee (see road use fee Level 2). 2010 Rase dear reflects the current policy status of no carbon 2035 Level 3 assumes no change from Level 2. emissions fees in place. Road use fee 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (no implementation of a carbon emissions fee). 20 i) Base Year reflects the current policy status of no light -duty 2035 Level 2 assumes no change from Level 1. vehicle mileage based road use fee. 2035 Level 3 assumes implementation of a carbon emissions fee 2(i i assumes no change from 2010 (no implementation that represents an estimated value of the external cost of trans - of a light -duty vehicle road use fee). portation GHG emissions. 2035 Level 2 assumes a transition of the 2011 State gas tax (HB 2001 increased the state gas tax to 30 cents per gallon) to an equivalent cost per mile road use fee. The total road use fee also f - , '� e 1 ' ' 4. � n 2010 2035 r+r4 .'. �s —z _ i y/ r Base Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 , 11, Reference case . _te a +' 7 . . 4 . -- • Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects more Reflects even more P Strategy conditions and policies ambitious policy changes ambitious policy changes - • Pay -as- you -drive insurance (percent of 0% 0% 00 % at $0.06 /mile �' households participating and cost) —=',-- `_ �' Gas tax (cost per gallon $2005) $0.42 $0.48 $0.18 from Level 2 s. - Road use fee (cost per mile $2005) $0 $0 $0.03 No change Carbon emissions fee (cost per ton) $0 $0 $0 $50 28 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Pricing - considerations moving forward Pricing strategies charge users directly for using transportation with needs, particularly for operations, maintenance and preser- facilities, affecting mode choice, timing and distance of travel. vation of existing public assets but also needed expansion of the Other potential Pricing can result in more efficient use of the transportation system system. Local revenue sources are being used to fund the majority benefits from the by shifting demand to make the most of past and future invest- of RTP investments. State and local government purchasing power Strategy Toolbox ments and limited sources of revenue. The scenarios analysis shows has steadily declined. Operating funds for the regional transit sys- Community benefits these strategies offer potentially significant GHG emissions reduc- tem are also declining, making it difficult to maintain existing Reduced number of tions. Other potential benefits identified in the Strategy Toolbox service levels and replace older bus fleets. Financing mechanisms uninsured motorists include the potential to be a significant source of revenue for com- to support land development and other community infrastructure Improved air quality and munity investments, congestion relief and inducing improvements needs are also limited. fewer air toxics emissions in fuel economy and the purchase of fuel- efficient vehicles. In Environmental benefits order to avoid pricing becoming a punitive strategy, it should be Current transportation pricing strategies reflect declining revenues Less pollution implemented in combination with expanding travel choices, and sources as improvements in fuel efficiency and inflation reduce Economic benefits marketing and incentives programs. the purchasing power of existing gas tax revenues. For example, New and more stable the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan finance strategy assumes revenue sources While the pricing strategies tested in Phase 1 of the Scenarios Proj- an increase in the state gas tax by $.01 per year, a price increase Consumer savings ect provided significant GHG emissions reductions. The Scenarios that the state is not currently implementing. In addition, there is Reduced fuel consumption Project needs to be realistic about pricing as a strategy given the no indication that current federal and state gas tax levels will be lack of public acceptance and current economic climate. adjusted to account for inflation or improvements in fuel efficiency. Without addressing these issues (either through new or existing Public acceptance, communications, evaluation of benefits, costs, pricing mechanisms) the region will not have the revenues needed equity, and use of revenues generated pose specific issues and chal- to implement existing plans and investment priorities, let alone lenges that have not yet been assessed. The following are some of consider more ambitious strategies such as doubling transit service the implications to be accounted for and further analyzed during levels or accommodating more growth in downtowns and other Phases 2 and 3: designated centers and employment areas. Equity considerations: The fairness of a given type of pricing mechanism depends on how it is structured, what transporta- While there is concern that increases in household and business tion choices are provided to users and which aspects of equity are transportation costs may negatively affect the economic health of most relevant and important to consider. It will be important to the region, there may be opportunities to transition existing pric- 1 The per capita costs of apply - more fully understand the potential issues, impacts and tradeoffs ing mechanisms to more stable revenue sources without drasti- ing a carbon tax of $50 per between benefits and costs of different pricing strategies. As ric- cally increasing the cost to drive. For example, the Phase 1 find- ton to a scenario that exactly p g g pric- demonstrate that applying a carbon tax of $50 per ton had meets the region's GHG emis ing strategies are considered, it is important to evaluate their effect sions reduction target (per little impact on household travel behavior.' However, transition- capita roadway emissions of on other parts of the region's transportation system and equity to ca p wa y ensure any unintended consequences are identified and addressed. ing the existing state gas tax, which is negatively impacted by both 1.2MT CO2e per year), is $120 fuel efficiency and inflation, to a road use fee or carbon tax could per year. The Phase 1 scenario considerations: F ederal and results indicate that this cost Stable and sustainable funding provide a more stable funding mechanism. It should be noted that increase by 2035 did not signif- state funding for infrastructure investments are not keeping pace a carbon fee is also affected by changes in fuel efficiency, which icantly affect travel behavior. needs to be further explored. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 29 Marketing and incentives - what we tested Households participating in eco- driving which reflects the percent of households with Eco- driving involves educating motorists on how to drive in proximity to high capacity transit and frequent . w�P` K' �' Fleet and Community v�,� technology design order to reduce fuel consumption and cut emissions. Examples bus service, as reflected in the 2035 RTP. NE • of eco- driving practices include avoiding rapid starts and stops, 4'.;, matching driving speeds to synchronized traffic signals, and Workers participating in employer -based a 0 ifCet ' .11'': ; Ro Pry9 avoiding idling. commuter programs ,A'- ,(;* q v 2010 Base Year reflects the current status of no existing eco- driving Employee commute options (ECO) programs Marketing and marketing programs. There is also no supporting data to indicate are work -based travel demand management fi incentives the proportion of households that follow eco- driving practices. programs, which can include, employer -sub- 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (no eco- driving sidized transit passes, bicycle parking, education and promo - marketing programs). tion, carpool and vanpool programs, etc. 2035 Level 2 reflects an adoption of and participation in eco- 2010 13ase Year is an estimate of current participation rates. driving marketing programs. The participation rate for this 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (continuation of marketing program reflects the state's Level 2 input assumption existing participation levels). for the first round of STS scenarios. 2035 Level 2 assumes a doubling of participation rates, which could reasonably be accomplished with increased programmatic Household participating in individualized marketing programs resources /funding and would not require a legislative change to Individualized marketing (IM) programs are travel demand the State ECO Rule. management programs focused on individual households. 2010 Base Year is an estimate of current participation rates. Car - sharing in high density areas 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (continuation of Because car - sharing is a relatively new phenomenon, Green - existing participation levels). STEP models the approximate effects of car - sharing on vehicle 2035 Level 2 assumes a significant increase in participation rates, travel and vehicle ownership. 2010 Base Year is an estimate of current participation rates. 2010 2035 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (continuation of Base Year Level 1 Level 2 existing participation rates). Reference case E 2035 Level 2 assumes a doubling of participation rates. Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects lime Reflects even more Strategy conditions and policies amtritious:poliey Ililshbitious policy changes N Households participating in eco- driving 0% 0% 40% Car- sharing in medium density areas a Households participating in 9% 9% 65% Because car- sharing is a relatively new phenomenon, Green- = individualized marketing programs STEP models the approximate effects of car - sharing on vehicle Si (II (percent) Workers participating in employer-based 20% 20% 40% No Level 3 travel and vehicle ownership. a 9 re commuter programs (percent) 2010 . Base Year is an estimate of current participation rates. 0, • Car-sharing in high density areas (target Participation rate of Participation rate of Double participation to 7 � 9 9 Y 9 P P P P 2035 Level. 1 assumes no change from 2010 (continuation of 2 participation rate) 1 member /100 people 1 member /100 people 2 members /100 people - existing participation rates). i Car - sharing in medium density areas Participation rate of Participation rate of Double participation to 1 member /200 people 1 member /200 people 2 members /200 people 2031 Level 2 assumes a doubling of participation rates. 30 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Marketing and incentives - considerations moving forward N Strategy lead Application and timing: These strategies are relatively easy Marketing and incentives Federal State Regional Local and inexpensive to implement, likely making them ideal near Other potential term o for GHG emissions red M and benefits from the Eco-driving Strategy Toolbox incentive programs are often successful when targeting neigh - Individualized marketing • • borhoods with good access to transportation options or 'planned Community benefits Employer commute programs • transportation investments, such as the opening of new high Increased physical activity Car - sharing • capacity transit or frequent bus service. Because individualized Enhanced public safety; marketing and employee commute option programs provide reduced risk of traffic injuries and fatalities information and incentives for a variety of travel options, it is Public education, marketing and incentives programs include critical that these programs be linked to transit investments and Improved air quality and fewer air toxics emissions teaching motorists to drive and maintain vehicles to operate other community design strategies to realize their full potential. more efficiently and building awareness of travel choices for Not only are these programs more successful at reducing the Environmental benefits personal and commute travel. Public education and market- amount people drive and, therefore, GHG emissions, they can Less pollution ing are often less costly than building new infrastructure and also increase the effectiveness of transit investments through Less energy use are supported by the public. These strategies can be tailored to improved ridership. Individualized marketing programs are also Economic benefits a diversity of perspectives and needs and provide the necessary effective when implemented with new transportation projects. Job opportunities platform from which to encourage eco- driving among the gen- Improved access to jobs, eral public and employees. In addition to encouraging eco -driv- Employer -based commute programs: The Employee Com- goods and services ing, public education and marketing can raise public awareness mute Options (ECO) Rule directs employers in the Portland met- Consumer savings about the benefits of driving less and riding transit, carpooling, ropolitan region with more than r .;,.- - Reduced fuel consumption ridesharing, telecommuting, biking, and walking — a focus of 100 employees at a given worksite Increased cost the region's Drive Less Save More campaign. to show a good faith effort towards effectiveness of transit reducing drive -alone commute trips y., investments through The Phase 1 scenarios analysis shows these strategies provide by 10 percent from an established , . ;- improved ridership moderate GHG emissions reductions. However, combining mar- . baseline.' Businesses affected by the .3 ( 1- y keting and incentives with other strategies, especially commu- ECO rule must survey their employ- _ ; nity design, provides additional emissions reductions that can ees every two years to measure prog- help meet the region's target. Other potential benefits identi- ress towards the goal, and create a plan that identifies the steps fied in the Strategy Toolbox report include increased physical they will take in pursuit of the 10 percent reduction. The most . activity from walking and biking, leading to additional positive recent estimates for the region assume . a roughly 20 percent par- ' The Employee Commute health outcomes; im roved air quality; increased access to jobs, ticipation rate for ECO programs. However, Level 2 demonstrates Options Program (Oregon ' p q y' l p p g ' Administrative Rule 340 - goods and services; and consumer savings. a doubling of this participation rate, which could reasonably be 242) is included in the State accomplished with increased programmatic resources and fund- of Oregon Clean Air Act The implications outlined below will be further explored during ing and would not require a legislative change to the state ECO Implementation Plan as adopted by the Environ- Phases 2 and 3 of the project: rule. It is possible that any further participation rate increases mental Quality Commission beyond Level 2 could require changes to the state ECO rule. under OAR 340 -200. • • Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 31 Roads - what we tested Freeway and arterial expansion Comm unity The road ca in in GreenSTEP onl models the affect of • Technology . • - . .... design roadway expansion relative to population growth and does not distinguish between the impact of new connections and projects — -,_ Fleet Pricing that widen existing roads. - • or 2010 Base Year reflects current freeway and arterial system. ' N r _ _ Roads Maa ^edting 2035 Level 1 assumes implementation of the 2035 financially _ ! + 1r1' .•. -� incentives constrained RTP road system. 2035 Level 2 assumes no roadway expansion beyond the 2010 f: ; ;WO' iliiiiii „ - n ' t a" , � :'�l r i rr . "O - 1 base year, and relies only on system management. - ... � - . " s "' + r Delay reduced by traffic management ii" :.. GreenSTEP provides a mechanism to evaluate the effects of sys- -- • , tem management programs on GHG emissions. System man- 3 r, . agement includes clearing vehicle breakdowns and crashes more s – �l quickly, traffic signal timing and other Intelligent Transporta- __ - �`'`" 1 W � Y1 g g g P . �V \ � sGUTH NORTH 4 ,___:_ tion System strategies that improve traffic flow and reduce delay. -- =� y ,,, • ._ _ �` — :� � S Seat tle; : . -. ■ 2010 Base Year assumes delay reduction as assumed in the - -- _ — ,.�., T - state's first round of STS Scenarios. i -� 111- � ; .' - 2035 Level 1 assumes no change from 2010 (no change in delay - - reduction). 2035 Level 2 assumes a tripling of delay reduction as assumed _, r.-: , in the state's first round of STS Scenarios. - e, '' - ' S. ` 1 Freeways allow people and goods to connect to major destinations across 2010 2035 the region, accommodating longer- distance regional and state -wide travel Base Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 and providing important access to the region's major activity centers, such Reference case as downtown Portland, and freight access to industrial areas and freight Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects more Reflects even more intermodal facilities. Strategy conditions and policies ambitious policy changes ambitious policy changes 0 Freeway and arterial expansion 2010 system 2035 financially constrained No expansion system No Level 3 Delay reduced by traffic management 10% 10% 35% strategies (percent) 32 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Roads - considerations moving forward Strategy lead areas. The following implications will be accounted for and fur - g they analyzed during Phases 2 and 3 of the Scenarios Project: Other potential Roads Federal State Regional Local Y g 1 benefits from the Freeway and arterial capacity 0, e Declining transportation revenues: As described in the pric- Strategy Toolbox Traffic management • • • ing strategies section, the purchasing power of transportation Community benefits revenues is in decline and infrastructure investments are not Increased physical activity Though our region has changed dramatically over the past cen- keeping pace with needs. This decline is anticipated to worsen Enhanced public safety; tury, the shape of the major street network serving the region as the vehicle fleet shifts to alternative fuels and light vehicle reduced risk of traffic has changed little. Most of the region's arterial streets were once fuel economy continues to improve. The 2035 RTP finance injuries and fatalities farm -to- market roads, many established along Donation Land strategy assumes existing federal, state and local funding for the Improved air quality and region's road system, plus other new revenues that were not part fewer air toxics emissions re Claim boundaries at half -mile or one -mile spacing. The region's g Y � P P highway system evolved from the mid- 1930s, when the first of the Phase 1 pricing assumptions, including increases in vehi- Environmental benefits highway was built from Portland to Milwaukie, to the comple- cle registration fees and tolling of the Columbia River Crossing Less pollution tion of I -205 in the early 1980s. Most of the highway system bridge to fund planned improvements in that corridor. Changes Less energy use was built along the same donation land claim grid that shapes to existing funding mechanisms are needed to implement exist - the major street system, with most throughways following older ing plans and investment priorities. Economic benefits farm -to- market routes or replacing arterial streets. Job opportunities Improving safety and system reliability for commuters Improved access to jobs, The roads policy area focused on managing existing road capac- and freight: Traffic management and other targeted capacity goods and services ity to improve traffic operations through a variety of strate- and arterial connectivity investments that improve safety and Consumer and business gies and expanding the existing road system as planned for in access to jobs and provide freight savings the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan to support all modes of access to industrial areas are criti- Reduced fuel consumption travel. When compared to traditional capital investments such cal investments to support the out - as new transit service, roads or additional lanes, traffic man- comes the region is trying to achieve • , , agement solutions offer a number of benefits for a compara- — particularly when combined with ;,'` tively low cost, and can delay or remove the need for additional other strategies that serve to expand - -- capital- intensive infrastructure. In addition to replacing some transportation choices. Together expensive capital projects, management solutions can also com- these coordinated efforts provide plement new capital projects as well as education and marketing for mobility and accessibility in a strategies. way that supports all modes of travel and the region's role as an international gateway and domestic freight hub. This in turn The scenarios analysis shows this policy area provided more helps businesses and industry remain competitive. modest GHG emissions reductions compared to the other policy . Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 33 Fleet and technology - what we tested 4/ Fleet mix Fuel economy Community The vehicle type model in GreenSTEP calculates the likelihood The fuel economy values reflect anticipated improvements in design that a vehicle is a light truck, which in western states tend to be light vehicle fuel efficiency for 2035 model year vehicles. higher than the national average. 2010 Base Year is an estimate of existing conditions. *; t 2010 Base Year is an estimate of existing conditions. 2035 Level 1 assumes a significant increase in fuel efficiency; -�' 2035 Level 1 assumes a relatively constant ratio between light on average it reflects a doubling of fuel efficiency by model year Roads Marketing trucks and autos compared to the 2010 base year. 2035. and p y incentives 2035 Level 2 assumes a significant shift in fleet mix with a 2035 Level 2 assumes a slight increase from the Level 1 growth in auto ownership relative to light truck ownership. assumptions. Fleet turnover rate Carbon intensity of fuels Fleet turnover reflects the rate at which new vehicles will replace 2010 Base Year is an estimate of existing conditions (see page existing vehicles. Since newer vehicles are typically more fuel 18 for a detailed description). efficient than older vehicles, newer fleets will yield greater GHG 2035 Level 1 assumes that the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels reductions. will be 10 percent below the current average by 2035, consistent 2010 Base Year is an estimate of existing conditions. with the adopted low carbon fuel standard. 2035 Level 1 maintains the current fleet turnover rate of 10 years. 2035 Level 2 assumes that vehicle fuel carbon intensity will be 2035 Level 2 increases the rate vehicle replacement to 8 years. 20 percent below the current average by 2035, which reflects a doubling of the proposed low carbon fuel standard. Plug -in hybrid and electric vehicles 2U10 Base Year is an estimate of existing conditions (see page 2010 2035 24 for a detailed description). c Base Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 1111 2035 Level 1 assumes the the mid- — Reference case _ Reflects existing Reflects current plans Reflects more Reflects even more point between the Base Year and Strategy conditions and policies ambitious policy changes ambitious polenges Level 2 and is the only technology Fleet mix (proportion of autos to light auto: 57% auto: 56% auto: 71% trucks and SUVs) light truck /SUV: 43% light truck /SUV: 44% light truck /SUV: 29% input that varies from the assump Fleet turnover rate (age) 10 years 10 years 8 years tions in the state Agencies' Techni Fuel economy (miles per gallon) auto: 29.2 mpg auto: 59.7 mpg auto: 68.5 mpg No Level 3 cal Report (http: / /www.oregon.gov/ light truck /SUV: 20.9 mpg light truck /SUV: 41 mpg light truck /SUV: 47.7 mpg ODOT /TD /TP /docs /OSTI /TechRpt. ', Carbon intensity of fuels 90 g CO /megajoule 81 g Co /megajoule 72 g CO /megajoule pdf). Light -duty vehicles that are electric or auto: 0% auto: 4% auto: 8% 2035 Level 2 is a general estimate of percent of light -duty vehi- plug-in hybrid electric light truck /SUV: 0% light truck /SUV: 1% light truck /SUV: 2% cles that are plug -in hybrids or electric vehicles, as reflected in All fleet and technology assumptions reflect the values defined in the State Agencies' Technical report (3/1/11). Level 2 relects the assump- the state Agencies Technical Report. tions recommended in the Metropolitan GHG Reduction Target Rule adopted by LCDC in May 2011 (http: / /www.oregon.gov/ LCD /docs/ rulemaking /trac/ 660_044.pdf), 34 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 Fleet and technology - considerations moving forward Strategy lead Uncertainty around fleet and technology assumptions: The Fleet and technology Federal State Regional Local region's target represents an additional reduction after account- Other potential in for anti fl an technology improvements. After benefits from the Fleet mix Strategy Toolbox estimating the reduction potential of these fleet and technology gy Fleet turnover 0 improvements, the region's 20 percent per capita reduction is Community benefits Fuel economy • • anticipated to come from a combination of community design, Improved air quality and marketin incentives and road policies. However, if fewer air toxics emissions Carbon intensity of fuel • • pricing, g incentives P Electric and plug hybrid the fleet and technology improvements assumed in OAR 660- Environmental benefits market share • • • • 044 are not achieved, then greater reductions may b nee Less pollution through these other policies. LCDC will review the state targets Less energy use in 2015 and may identify adjustments at that time in light of The proportion of vehicles on the road with improved fuel tech- new information. Economic benefits nology is a major determinant of GHG emissions per mile of Job opportunities travel. Other potential benefits of fleet and technology improve- To meet technology and fleet assumptions, actions are Consumer and business ments, identified in the Strategy Toolbox, include improved air needed across multiple sectors and all levels of govern- savings quality; consumer and business savings; and reduced fuel con- ment: Both Levels 1 and 2 of the fleet and technology policy Municipal savings sumption. The Phase 1 scenarios analysis demonstrates these areas will take considerable effort to implement. For example, ies provide significant GHG emissions reduction poten- Leverage private investment strate g P g P the Phase 1 Reference Case assumes a doubling in fuel efficiency tial. Much work is being done at the state and federal levels to for model year 2035 vehicles from 2010. This Reduced fuel consumption expand the number of vehicles with higher fuel efficiency and technology improvement will require signifi- lower emissions, and to reduce the carbon content of fuels. cant financial investments and policy actions However, there is uncertainty about whether or not the tech- across multiple sectors and scales, including nology and fleet assumptions recommended through the LCDC funding for research and partnerships with Target Rulemaking process will be achieved by 2035. This businesses and educational institutions. In uncertainty, and the implications outlined below, will be further addition, state and local policy changes can be ,' explored during Phases 2 and 3 of the project. y 1 Pursuant to HB 2186, the ex P g P 1 made to encourage acceptance of low- carbon authority to implement a fuels and electric vehicle and plug -in hybrid % � � Low Carbon Fuel Standard The role of Level 1 fleet and technology: While the region's technology. For example, the carbon inten- in Oregon will sunset on December 31, 2015 unless Reference Case is consistent with the state's scenario work, it sity of fuels for the Reference Case (Level 1) is anticipated to that sunset is lifted by the should be noted that some of the technology assumptions reflect decrease 10 percent from 2010 levels by 2035, reflecting imple- Oregon Legislature. considerable efficiency improvements, the certainty of which mentation of the Low Carbon Fuel Standards (LCFS) — a stan- 2 Oregon Department of are unknown. Specifically, the carbon intensity and fuel econ- dard that has not yet been implemented and without legislative Environmental Quality, omy improvements in the Reference Case reflect considerable action will sunset in 2015. The existence of a LCFS program Oregon Low Carbon advancements that more closely reflect Level 2 levels than cur- would likely increase the incentive to expand market the EV ket Fuel Process andy Commmi tttee ee P Pr rocess and rent conditions. share. A sunset of the LCFS in 2015 could undermine existing Program Design, January efforts to improve fuel efficiency. 25, 2011. Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 35 Phase 1 at a glance: results from selected scenarios : 01111111•1111111111111P How far do current Scenario 1 — 2035 Reference Case What is the range of Scenario 5 Current policies Boost all policies but pricing and technology policies get us? A possible reductions? o , Result: 1.8 MT CO o 3 Result: 1.2 MT CO Findings: Current plans and E Findings: Ninety -three out E policies are on the right track o - of 144 scenarios meet or o 0 . 2 0...0....0. 2 — ° °,° and provide substantial per cap- exceed the target. d ita GHG emissions reductions 0 w 0 but do not meet the target. C P M R F T The reductions ranged from c P M R F T Policy areas Policy areas 20 to 53 percent below 2005 Community design or pricing Scenario 2 levels on a per capita basis. Scenario 6 must be more ambitious than Boost fleet and technology Boost all policies but pricing current policies to meet the c target. R esult: 1 MTCO o Result: 1.0 MT CO F. F. w 2 2 2 0. ...0 0 0 2 ©....© ©....,0 - 32 °,° 0 LEGEND ;, Region's per '�.2` J 0......0... 1 1 J 1 0 capita target = MT Cole C P M R F T C P M R F T Policy areas Policy areas Policy areas: C Community design Scenario 3 Scenario 7 Boost system efficiency Boost all policies to level 2 P Pricing M Marketing and incentives ` 3 Result: 1.7 MT CO `o_ 3 Result: .9 MT CO a a R Roads 2 2 ©....© 2 2 0 0....0...0...0...0....0 — 40% F Fleet 0 N T Technology A' 0...0 1 1 00 I 1 i 1 ' C P M R F T C P M R F T Results: Policy areas Policy areas 1.8 MT CO does not meet Scenario 4 Scenario 8 target Boost fleet, technology and system efficiency Boost all policies to their most ambitious level 1.2 MT CO meets target o s Result: 1.3 MT CO,e 2 0 0 Result: .72 MT CO .0 Percent reduction in GHG ,0 2 2 ©. . .. © .... ©....© 0 2 2 E -0••0• - 53% emissions from 2005 N J 0...0 . , , , -I 1 1 1 , d The scenarios tested are for research pur- poses only and do not necessarily reflect C P M R F T C P M R F T current or future policy decisions of the Policy areas Policy areas Metro Council, MPAC or JPACT. 36 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 What is the effect of the Scenario 9 What is the effect of Scenario 13 Boost community design and system efficiency Boost pricing alone built environment? pricing? O 3 _ Result: 1.4 MT CO o 3 3 Result: 1.5 MT CO F. Findings: Similar reductions E Findings: Pricing when com- E are possible through the most o 0 2 ... 2 biped with the most ambitiou a 2 0 2 2 2 2 • ambitious community design and fleet and technology strategies fleet /technology scenarios. 3 0 1 © meets the target. 0 0 ... 0 ... 0 ... 0 C P M R F T C P M R F T Policy areas Policy areas Combining more ambitious community design with the most Scenario 10 Scenario 14 ambitious system efficiency Boost community design and marketing Boost pricing, fleet and technology A- policies is not enough to meet c c 0 3 , Result: 1.4 MT CO 0 3 Result: 1.2 MT CO target. c 0 • z © 2 2 2 c 2 0 2 2 0 - 22% N ;: N ...0 J 1 0 1 WOO J 0 1 0 1 1 C P M R F T C P M R F T Policy areas Policy areas Scenario 11 Scenario 15 Boost community design even more Boost most ambitious pricing alone 0 0 =. Result: 1.1 MT CO 0 3 0 Result: 1.5 MT CO Z1 E • 2 ' '•. 2 0 2 2 2 — 29% 0 2 l 2 •: 2 2 2 2 N J 1 0.0-0 J 0 0....0...0...0 C P M R F T C P M R F T Policy areas Policy areas Scenario 12 Scenario 16 Boost fleet and technology Most ambitious pricing, fleet and technology Result: 1.1 MT CO 3 Result: 1.2 MT CO a a o © 2 2 © .... ©— 31% c z .' 2 ` : 2 2 0..0 — 22% • O 0 . 1 J • • 1 , C P M R F T C P M R F T Policy areas Policy levers Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 37 Glossary Car - sharing: A model similar to a car Fleet mix: The percentage of vehicles Metropolitan GreenSTEP travel behav- lowing selection of a preferred sce- rental where a member user rents cars classified as automobiles compared for estimates are made irrespective of nario, the local governments within for short periods of time, often by the to the percentage classified as light housing choice or supply; the model the Metro jurisdiction are to amend hour. Such programs are attractive to trucks (weighing less than 10,000 only considers the demand forecast their comprehensive plans and land customers who make only occasional Ibs.); light trucks make up 43 percent components — household size, income use regulations to be consistent with use of a vehicle, as well as others who of the light -duty fleet today. and age — and the policy areas con- the preferred scenario. For more infor- would like occasional access to a vehi- sidered in this analysis. Therefore, mation go to: http: / /www.leg.state. cle of a different type than they use Fleet turnover: The rate of vehicle there is no Phase 1 assumption about or.us /09reg /measpdf /hb2000.dir/ day -to -day. The organization renting replacement or the turnover of older the type of housing assumed to be hb2001.en.pdf. the cars may be a commercial business vehicles to newer vehicles; the current built in the future. For Phase 2 of the or the users may be organized as a turnover rate in Oregon is 10 years. Scenarios Project, Metro staff are Individualized marketing: Travel company, public agency, cooperative, developing a model — compatible demand management programs or peer -to -peer. The Portland region Greenhouse gas emissions: Accord- with Metropolitan GreenSTEP — that focused on individual households. IM has Zipcar — http: / /www.zipcar.com/ ing to the Environmental Protection will incorporate housing preference, programs involve individualized out - Agency, gases that trap heat in the supply and capacity considerations. reach to households that identify house - Eco- driving: A combination of pub- atmosphere are called greenhouse This will provide the tools needed to hold travel needs and ways to meet lic education and driving practices that gases emissions. Greenhouse gases evaluate changes in housing assump- those needs with less vehicle travel. result in more efficient vehicle opera- that are created and emitted through tions as part of the decision - making tion and reduced fuel consumption human activities include carbon dioxide process. Light vehicles: Vehicles weighing and emissions. Examples of eco -driv- (emitted through the burning of fossil 10,000 pounds or Tess, and include ing practices include avoiding rapid fuels), methane, nitrous oxide and flu- House Bill 2001 (Oregon Jobs and cars, light trucks, sport utility vehicles, starts and stops, matching driving orinated gases. For more information Transportation Act): Passed by the motorcycles and small delivery trucks. speeds to synchronized traffic signals, see www.epa.gov/climatechange/emis- Legislature in 2009, this legislation and avoiding idling. sions /index.html. provided specific directions to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard: In Portland metropolitan area to under- 2009, the Oregon legislature autho- Employer -based commute pro- GreenSTEP: GreenSTEP is a new take scenario planning and develop rized the Environmental Quality Com- grams: Work -based travel demand model developed to estimate GHG two or more land use and transpor- mission to develop low carbon fuel management programs that can emissions at the individual house- tation scenarios by 2012 that accom- standards (LCFS) for Oregon. Each include transportation coordinators, hold level. It estimates greenhouse modate planned population and type of transportation fuel (gaso- employer- subsidized transit pass pro- gas emissions associated with vehi- employment growth while achiev- line, diesel, natural gas, etc.) contains grams, ride - matching, carpool and cle ownership, vehicle travel, and fuel ing the GHG emissions reduction tar- carbon in various amounts. When vanpool programs, telecommuting, consumption, and is designed to oper- gets approved by LCDC in May 2011. the fuel is burned, that carbon turns compressed or flexible work weeks ate in a way that allows it to show the Then Metro, after public review and into carbon dioxide (CO which is and bicycle parking and showers for potential effects of different policies consultation with local governments, a greenhouse gases. The goal is to bicycle commuters. and other factors on vehicle travel and is to select a preferred scenario. Fol- reduce the average carbon intensity emissions. of Oregon's transportation fuels by 38 Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 10 percent below 2010 levels by 2022 meet Oregon's goals to reduce GHG systems, vehicle and fuel technologies r and applies to the entire mix of fuel emissions. The effort includes five and urban form by 2050. Upon com- available in Oregon. Carbon intensity main areas: Statewide Transportation pletion, the strategy will be adopted 4 ' refers to the emissions per unit of fuel; Strategy development, GHG emission by the Oregon Transportation Com f y_ it is not a cap on total emissions or a reduction targets for metropolitan mission. For more information go to: limit on the amount of fuel that can areas, land use and transportation sce- http: / /www.oregon.gov /ODOT /TD/ be burned. The lower the carbon con- nario planning guidelines, tools that OSTI /STS.shtml. 4 i .', tent of a fuel, the fewer greenhouse support MPOs and local governments gas emissions it produces. and public outreach. For more infor- System efficiency: Strategies that mation, go to www.oregon.gov /odot/ optimize the use of the existing Pay -as- you -drive insurance (PAYD): td /osti transportation system, including ' , This pricing strategy converts a por- traffic management, employer-based .. „ tion of liability and collision insurance Policy areas: Categories of land use commute programs, individualized ry o ¢� i from dollars-per-year to cents-per-mile and transportation strategies used in marketing and car sharing. J rr's"r'i -i to charge insurance premiums based GreenSTEP to show how the applica- ,,.i' ` - - -' • on the total amount of miles driven tion of different policies may impact Traffic incident management: Olt" , ,`..0 • per vehicle on an annual basis and GHG emissions. A policy area can be A coordinated process to detect, --'' - other important rating factors, such adjusted at different levels of imple- P 9 adjusted P respond to, and remove traffic inci , ,, as the driver's safety record. If a vehi- mentation in the model, for example, dents from the roadway as safely and 4 cle is driven more, the crash risk con- changes in fuel economy standards. quickly as possible, reducing ' q y p 9 non sequently increases. PAYD insurance recurring roadway congestion. charges policyholders according to Scenario: A term that is used to their crash risk. describe a possible future, represent- Traffic management: Strategies that ing a hypothetical set of strategies or improve transportation system opera - Oregon Sustainable Transporta- sequence of events. tions and efficiency, including ramp tion Initiative (OSTI): An integrated metering, active traffic management, statewide effort to reduce GHG emis- Scenario planning: A process that traffic signal coordination and real - sions from the transportation sector tests different actions and policies to time traveler information regarding by integrating land use and transpor- see their affect on GHG emissions traffic conditions, incidents, delays, tation. Guided by stakeholder input, reduction and other quality of life travel times, alternate routes, weather the initiative has built collaborative indicators. conditions, construction, or special partnerships among local govern- events. ments and the state's six Metropoli- Statewide Transportation Strat- tan Planning Organizations to help egy: The strategy, as part of OSTI, will define a vision for Oregon to reduce its GHG emissions from transportation Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project, Phase 1 Findings, January 2012 39 Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) About Metro r This report contains I Jerry Willey, City of Hillsboro, MPAC Chair Clean air and clean water do not stop at city limits or county information that is i Loretta Smith, Multnomah County, First Vice -Chair lines. Neither does the need for jobs, a thriving economy, and intended for research Jody Carson, City of West Linn, Second Vice -Chair • purposes only and does Charlotte Lehan, Clackamas County sustainable transportation and living choices for people and not necessarily reflect Shane Bemis, City of Gresham businesses in the region. Voters have asked Metro to help with current or future policy Norm Thomas, City of Troutdale the challenges and opportunities that affect the 25 cities and decisions of the Metro Sam Adams, City of Portland three counties in the Portland metropolitan area. Council, MPAC or Amanda Fritz, City of Portland Jack Hoffman, City of Lake Oswego A regional approach simply makes sense when it comes to pro - JPACT. William Wild, Oak Lodge Sanitary District viding services, operating venues and making decisions about Andy Duyck, Washington County The preparation Keith Mays, City of Sherwood how the region grows. Metro works with communities to sup - of this report was Marilyn McWilliams, Tualatin Valley Water District port a resilient economy, keep nature close by and respond to a financed in part by the Steve Clark, TriMet Board of Directors • changing climate. Together we're making a great place, now and Oregon Department Nathalie Darcy, Washington Co. Citizen for generations to come. of Transportation, Wilda Parks, Clackamas Co. Citizen U.S. Department of Matt Berkow, Multnomah Co. Citizen www.oregonmetro.gov Transportation, Federal Jim Rue, Oregon Dept. of Land Conservation & Development, Highway Administration Steve Stuart, Clark County Metro Council President and Federal Transit Laura Hudson, City of Vancouver . Carl Hosticka, Metro Council Tom Hughes . Administration. The Barbara Roberts, Metro Council opinions, findings and Kathryn Harrington,. Metro Council Metro Councilors conclusions expressed Annette Mattson, David Douglas School Board Shirley Craddick, District 1 in this report are not Doug Neeley, City of Oregon City Carlotta Collette, District 2 necessarily those of the Denny Doyle, City of Beaverton Carl Hosticka, District 3 Oregon Department Ken Allen, Oregon AFSCME Council 75 Kathryn Harrington, District 4 of Transportation, Rex Burkholder, District 5 U.S. Department of Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) Transportation, Federal Carlotta Collette, Metro Council, JPACT Chair Barbara Roberts, District 6 Highway Administration Rex Burkholder, Metro Council, JPACT Vice -Chair Auditor Shirley Craddick, Metro Council and Federal Transit Ann Lininger, Clackamas County Suzanne Flynn Administration. Deborah Kafoury, Multnomah County Roy Rogers, Washington County Sam Adams, City of Portland For more information, Donna Jordan, City of Lake Oswego V Metro 1 Making a great place visit www. Shane Bemis, City of Gresham Craig Dirksen, City of Tigard oregonmetro.gov / Neil McFarlane, TriMet climatescenarios Jason Tell, ODOT Nina DeConcini, DEQ Don Wagner, Washington State DOT Bill Wyatt, Port of. Portland Jack Burkman, City of Vancouver Steve Stuart, Clark County 12147jg AIS -762 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 02/14/2012 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Review and Discuss the Proposed 2012 Federal Legislative Agenda Prepared For: Kent Wyatt Submitted By: Kent Wyatt, City Management Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main • Information ISSUE To what extent does the proposed 2012 Federal Legislative Agenda reflect the needs of Tigard? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Consider approving the federal legislative agenda. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The city contracted with the federal lobbying firm CFM Strategic Communications in October 2011. CFM visited the city in early December 2011 to meet with staff and the City Council to understand the potential for advocacy for city interests at the federal level. Since then, CFM has drafted Tigard's 2012 Federal Legislative Agenda for the City Council to consider. If approved, the agenda will provide individual councilors and city staff a coordinated approach to advocate on behalf of the city for the stated positions as opportunities arise in 2012. The federal agenda will also be a useful communication tool for councilors attending the National League of Cities Conference in Washington, DC from March 10 -14. CFM staff will use the agenda throughout the year to advocate for the city's interests. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Submit revisions to the proposed Federal Legislative Agenda. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Financial Stability DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION December 13, 2011: Discuss Federal Legislative Priorities with CFM Strategic Communications, Inc. Attachments Federal Legislative Agenda CITY OF TIGARD I II e TIGARD 2012 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA GRANT PRIORITIES Fanno Creek Regional Trail Completing portions of the existing paved multi-use Fanno Creek Regional Trail will connect neighborhoods with schools, parks, jobs and downtown Tigard. The trail provides an off - street alternative to walking and riding on busy roads as well as opportunities for healthy outdoor activities. Federal Request: $200,000 Aquifer Storage and Recovery Well The Water Distribution System Hydraulic Study identified a need for the expansion of the City's Aquifer Storage and Recover program. In fiscal year 2007 -2008, a 1,000 ft deep well was successfully drilled. Well head improvements which include the installation of a pump motor and accompanying pipe and chlorination system are scheduled in 2012. The pump station will provide 2.5 million gallons of water per day during dry summer months. Federal Request : $750,000. Pacific Highway (99W) /Gaarde /McDonald Intersection Auxiliary through lanes and turn lanes, combined with raised medians, problem access closures and completed sidewalks will dramatically improve safety at this worst bottleneck and highest crash - frequency location on Pacific Highway. Improvements should result in over a dozen fewer crashes per year; millions in yearly congestion cost savings; reduced exhaust pollution; better sidewalks, transit access and safety. Total Cost: $5 million; Federal Request: $1 million Tigard Economic Revitalization and Neighborhood Improvement Plan The City of Tigard seeks federal dollars to fund a neighborhood revitalization plan to transform distressed neighborhoods and public and assisted projects into viable and sustainable mixed- income neighborhoods by linking housing improvements with appropriate services, schools, public assets, transportation, and access to jobs. A strong emphasis will be placed on local community planning for access to high -quality educational opportunities, including early childhood education. Federal Request: $250,000 DRAFT REVISED:2 /1/12 72nd Avenue from Dartmouth Street to Hampton Street Widening to two lanes each direction, sidewalks, bike lanes and transit stop amenities will address inadequate transportation access in this major employment area. The project will open the Tigard Triangle to private development, which supports job creation. Total Cost: $ 13 million; Federal Request: $2 million Community Oriented Policing Solutions COPS grant funding advances public safety through community policing by addressing the new and /or rehire of full-time sworn law enforcement officers to increase their community policing capacity and crime prevention efforts. Federal Request: TBA PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD Pacific Highway (99W) /Barbur Boulevard High Capacity Transit Alternative Analysis An alternatives analysis and preliminary engineering study to determine the best high capacity connection to provide transportation options to connect downtown Portland, Tigard, King City, Tualatin and Sherwood. Reductions in automobile trips will reduce roadway congestion and pollution, reduce accidents and set the groundwork for efficient development along the transit line. Total Cost: $ 11.4 million; Federal Request: $1 million Lake Oswego- Tigard Watershed Partnership In August 2008, the cities of Lake Oswego and Tigard formally endorsed a partnership agreement for sharing drinking water resources and costs. Tigard residents need a secure, dependable water source. Lake Oswego's water supply system is near capacity, and key facilities need expansion and upgrades. Sharing the cost of new infrastructure will keep water affordable for both communities' customers. Total Cost: $240 million; Federal Request: $2 million POLICY ITEMS Support job creation by reauthorizing SAFETEA LU - Investing in our transportation infrastructure is a critical component to facilitate economic growth, international competitiveness and job creation. The City supports a robust transportation reauthorization bill to repair our nation's crumbling transportation network, relieve congestion and improve the flow of goods and services. Transportation, Community, and System Preservation (TCSP) Program, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program, Economic Development Administration (EDA) Grants, Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) Grants - The City supports maintaining funding for these critical local programs. DRAFT REvisED:2 /1/12 First Responders D -Block Spectrum and Funding for Interoperability Network (S. 911, HR 2482 and H.R. 607) Tigard supports pending legislation in House and Senate that would allocate the D Block spectrum within the 700 MHz band, provide $11 billion in funding to build out and sustain a modern nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network and provide a strong governance structure. NEPA Exemption for Small Projects Tigard supports AASHTO's Board adopted policy to define FHWA's funding approval as a federal action only if the funding exceeds a de minimis threshold. This would be defined in two ways: (1) as a total dollar amount or (2) as a percentage of total project costs. Funding approvals that fall below these thresholds would not trigger requirements that apply to `federal actions' nor would these projects need to meet other federal (Title 23) requirements. They could be administered under existing state procedures. EPA Regulatory Concerns and Unfunded Mandates - the City opposes legislative or regulatory initiatives that undermine local government decision making and contributes to reduction in our workforce. The partnership with federal policy makers should recognize local government roles and no preempt city authority on issues such as land use, rights of way and other local functions. Contact Information: Joel Rubin (202) 347 -9171 jocIr(cfmdc.com DRAFT REVISED:2 /1/12