In the early 1990s, Oregon was one of the first to adopt statewide administrative rules requiring transportation planning based on roads sized to accommodate vehicles during the height of demand – typically the pm peak hour. Although the rules contemplated planning for alternative transportation, the focus was on single-occupancy-vehicle congestion during the business-hour commute. Couple that with minimum parking requirements that were based on, for example, square feet in a grocery store or the number of seats in a theater – with little attention to peak times of usage or shared parking opportunities. The result is dispersed uses surrounded by parking that discourages walking, cycling and investment in public transportation. Residential, off-street parking mandates not only separates homes from supporting commercial uses but also significantly increases the cost of housing. A variety of sources have estimated that the cost of requiring off-street parking to multifamily housing adds $20,000 to $60,000 per unit.

In response to Oregon falling further and further behind in achieving greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by the Oregon Legislature in 2007, Gov. Kate Brown issued Executive Order 20-04 mandating that all agencies, including the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) adopt rules directing local plans to meet these goals. The resulting Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules imposed new planning obligations that, despite applying statewide, are primarily directed at the Portland-metro area and Oregon’s other seven metropolitan areas, including 52 of its most populous cities.

The obligations get complicated quickly but the one that is easiest to understand and will likely see immediate impact (and perhaps greatest immediate consternation) is that local governments may no longer require off-street parking in transit-serving areas or for certain uses. As of Jan. 1, 2023, metropolitan governments are prohibited from applying any regulations that impose minimum off-street parking mandates within three-quarters of a mile of a rail transit stop or within half a mile of “transit corridors.” The definition of “transit corridor” can change based on subsequent transportation planning, but for purposes of the immediate deadline, it includes bus service with a scheduled frequency of at least four times an hour during peak service.

Portland long ago eliminated off-street parking minimums within the urban core, much of which is served by MAX light rail and streetcar lines, so the new rules will not have much impact there. However, TriMet offers peak-hour bus service more than once every 15 minutes snaking through most Metro-area suburban areas, so the rules will likely have a significant impact for new development whether it is commercial, industrial, single-family or multifamily. Further, local governments are prohibited from requiring off-street parking for special uses such as residential units smaller than 750 square feet, group homes, affordable housing, shelters, and day care facilities. These rules do not preclude development from electing to provide off-street parking subject to any otherwise applicable maximum limit regulations.

Although there may be some flexibility in timing where appropriate progress is made, by June 2023, affected cities must either repeal all parking mandates within their boundaries or adopt a package of parking reform options including, for example, charging for all off-street parking separate from rent (even for commercial and industrial uses), imposing a tax on parking revenue, and adopting parking maximums. By Sept. 30, 2023, cities with populations exceeding 100,000 that elect not to remove parking mandates must charge on-street parking prices equivalent to at least 50 cents per day per spot for 5 percent of the total on-street parking supply, with an increase to 10 percent of the supply by Sept. 30, 2025.

With respect to reviewing applications for new development, by March 31, 2023, all cities must require that at least 40 percent of parking spaces in new multifamily or multiuse developments have conduits to serve electric vehicle charging. As of June 30, 2025, all transportation modeling accomplished for development review must show that the project will not increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This last standard may prove challenging and may require a whole new evaluation framework for developers and public and private transportation engineers who up to this point are focused on mitigated impacts from vehicles rather than not having them.

What might be of greater interest to planning policy wonks is that these rules require local governments to study and identify areas suitable for designation as Climate Friendly Areas (CFAs). The rules provide that by the end of 2023, all larger non-Portland metropolitan cities such as Eugene/Springfield, Bend, Salem/Keizer/Albany, Corvallis/Philomath, Grants Pass/Medford/Ashland must submit to the DLCD a CFA study and follow up with implementing CFA plan policies, zoning designations and development standards. CFAs must be sized, either together or separately, to accommodate at least 30 percent of the total identified number of housing units necessary to meet all current and future housing needs.

This feeds into the housing needs analysis obligations imposed by HB 2001 from a few years ago. Only lands with high levels of alternative transportation and in proximity to urban centers may qualify. In addition, these studies must include a Housing Production Strategy Report explaining how equitable housing objectives will be achieved, including how the city is affirmatively furthering fair housing opportunities for communities of color, low-income communities, people with disabilities, and other state- and federal-protected classes as well as addressing homelessness, affordably homeownership, displacement and gentrification. The DLCD is to evaluate the accuracy and sufficiency of each report against a series of review criteria and either approve or remand the report for further study. Implementing CFA zones and development code standards, including prioritization of public buildings, open spaces, as well as block length maximums, must be adopted within one year thereafter.

On the strictly transportation planning side, the rules mandate transportation system plan (TSP) major amendments and detailed transportation modeling on a schedule for local government compliance. Portland Metro and Salem/Keizer/Albany initial study efforts must be accomplished no later than May 31, 2024. The rules require authorizing greater development in transit corridors and downtowns, prioritizing multimodal performance measures (as opposed to focusing solely on capacity enhancements for vehicles), and prioritizing public investments accordingly. Again, all transportation modeling may not increase VMT per capita. Given increases in background traffic, particularly pass-through traffic which local governments independently cannot control, the framework for this modeling will take additional work.

Although the DLCD and ODOT have committed to assisting local governments in these efforts, the existing legislative funding commitment extends only to cover the project deadlines within this biennium. The DLCD received $768,000 from the Legislature to be used for equitable engagement and scenario planning for potential CFA area. The city of Springfield has estimated its planning costs will far exceed its proportional share of this appropriation. Although Minneapolis and San Francisco have adopted regulations prohibiting off-street parking requirements, Oregon is the first state to attempt to force cities into a more urban, dense, multimodal model that includes all larger cities. The success of this effort will hinge on the Legislature’s commitment to fund local government efforts and the public’s willingness to embrace transforming Oregon into a future that prioritizes fighting climate change over accommodating cars.

Edward Sullivan is a retired practitioner of land use and municipal law with more than 50 years of experience. Contact him at esulliva@gmail.com.

Carrie Richter is an attorney specializing in land use and municipal law at Bateman Seidel. Contact her at 503-972-9903 or crichter@batemanseidel.com.

The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the preceding commentary are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Daily Journal of Commerce or its editors. Neither of the authors nor the 91��Ƶ guarantees the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein.

The post OP-ED: New climate change rules mandate more diverse transportation options appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Two Portland-area transit projects will receive a total of nearly $125 million in funding from the Federal Transit Administration, the U.S. Department of Transportation announced.

The funding includes $99.99 million for an extension and improvements to TriMet‘s MAX Red Line and $24.9 million for a 10-mile C-TRAN bus rapid transit line through Vancouver, Washington. The projects are among 12 nationwide selected to receive a total of $891 million via the FTA’s Capital Investments Grants program.

The MAX improvement project, named A Better Red, will extend MAX Red Line service west from the Beaverton Transit Center to the Fair Complex/Hillsboro Airport station. Also, a second track will be added near the Gateway Transit Center and Portland International Airport; that upgrade is expected to improve reliability of Green Line and Blue Line trains that share the same tracks.

The project’s design and environmental review phase is expected to last through early next year. Construction is expected to commence in spring 2021 and last through 2024. The total project cost is $206 million, including six new light-rail vehicles to accommodate increased service. TriMet will cover the remainder of the project cost, with contributions from Metro and the Port of Portland.

C-TRAN’s Mill Plain BRT is a $49.86 million project that will provide bus rapid transit from downtown Vancouver to east Vancouver. The bus line will span 10 miles and include 21 stations at key locations including Clark College, PeaceHealth Southwest Medical Center and Columbia Tech Center.

The line’s seven buses will travel east from downtown along West Evergreen Boulevard before crossing Interstate 5 and proceeding slightly north to Fort Vancouver. From there, buses will travel along East Mill Plain Boulevard until the line terminates at a new transit center near Southeast 184th Avenue.

About $21 million in C-TRAN capital funds and $4.2 million in Federal Highway Administration flexible funds will cover the remainder of the project cost. Construction is expected to begin by next year, and service is scheduled to begin in October 2022.

The post Metro-area projects awarded federal funding appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Portland Bureau of Transportation is painting the town – or at least certain street lanes – red.

PBOT crews began to paint red bus lanes on Wednesday on Southwest Main Street between First and Second avenues.

The project aims to speed buses through traffic. The Federal Highway Administration has given permission for some U.S. cities, including Portland, to use red paint as a signal of bus prioritization.

The red lanes are transit priority routes where other modes are prohibited or limited. Cars, trucks, taxis and services such as Uber and Lyft are not allowed to use the lanes. Cyclists may use the lanes in certain locations, according to PBOT.

In addition to the downtown stretch of Main Street, red lanes will be coming to the intersections of Northeast Martin Luther King, Jr. and Lloyd boulevards, Northeast Grand Avenue and Burnside Street, and Northeast Grand Avenue and Couch Street.

“These new red lanes signal our commitment to doing everything we can to make transit an attractive option for more Portlanders and prioritizing tangible climate action in the face of looming climate catastrophe,” Commissioner Chloe Eudaly stated in a news release.

Experience in New York City and San Francisco has shown reduced collisions and lane violations after red lane treatments, according to PBOT.

Portland State University will collect data to evaluate the lanes’ performance. Metro and Portland Streetcar are also supporting the project.

More red lanes will be painted in downtown Portland in 2020, according to PBOT.

The post PBOT begins painting red bus lanes appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Transportation planners and engineers are facing big choices that will affect residents in Southwest Portland and beyond for decades to come.

A new MAX light-rail line is . The route is broken into four sections, beginning at the south end of Portland’s city core, near Portland State University, and ending at Bridgeport Village in southeast Tigard. Options for each section carry a variety of advantages and drawbacks that include property impacts, travel times and cost.

has fallen on a steering committee featuring representatives of key agencies such as Metro, TriMet and area municipalities. Choosing wisely should provide commuters an efficient system for a reasonable cost. Choosing poorly could leave the region with an expensive and underused line.

Here is a look at options being considered:

Section 1: leaving downtown Portland

From Portland State University, at the southern end of the transit mall, the MAX would follow either Barbur Boulevard or run along Naito Parkway. After the streets converge, the line would follow Barbur Boulevard at least until reaching Southwest 13th Avenue.

Stay on Barbur Boulevard:

“Its big advantage is it would provide closer connection to Marquam Hill,” said Chris Ford, Metro’s Southwest Corridor Plan project manager.

The route would provide for a stop that would lead to either a tunnel with an elevator or steps leading up to Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU).

The route would be faster than Naito Parkway, by between 60 to 90 seconds. Barbur Boulevard also would be less expensive, although if a tunnel is chosen to access Marquam Hill, cost savings would be minimal.

The negative consequences of staying on Barbur Boulevard would largely focus on impacts to local property owners, ranging from relocation to inconvenience during construction.

Naito Parkway:

Ford said the major advantage of following Naito Parkway is that it would provide an additional stop and easier access to the orange line for riders coming from or going to Milwaukie.

A big factor working against this alignment is price. Large sections of Naito Parkway are elevated and would have to be rebuilt. Access to the Ross Island Bridge would also have to be reconfigured. Currently, drivers access the bridge through a route close to area residents. Using this route would likely mean building a traditional ramp to the bridge.

“It’s much more expensive,” Ford said. “It’s a loaded cost, but you get a benefit out of it.”

Another factor against its use is that the route would make access to Marquam Hill longer by about two blocks, which could hinder people with physical infirmities.

Section 2: Southwest 13th Avenue to the Tigard Triangle

From Southwest 13th Avenue, the light-rail line could either continue to follow Barbur Boulevard to the Tigard Triangle or follow a route adjacent to Interstate 5.

Barbur Boulevard:

The biggest advantage to staying on Barbur Boulevard is that stations would become much more convenient to access. The track would run down the middle of the road, which would be widened to accommodate two lanes on each side, plus bike lanes and sidewalks. The sidewalks would extend the entire route. Currently, sidewalks have significant gaps along both sides of the busy thoroughfare.

Also, reconstruction of the road could spur major redevelopment in the area.

The biggest challenge is the disruption that construction would cause. Much of the road would have to be rebuilt for the rail line. Major utility lines run under the street and would be affected. Significant land acquisitions would be required and the relocation of a large number of businesses would have to relocate. Also, traffic on a major commuter route into downtown Portland would be affected.

“Back in December 2016, our steering committee preferred to be on Barbur Boulevard, knowing what redevelopment issues might be there,” Ford said.

Adjacent to Interstate 5:

Another option would be to leave Barbur Boulevard at Southwest 13th Avenue and follow Interstate 5 to the Tigard Triangle.

The biggest advantage to staying along Interstate 5, as compared to staying on Barbur Boulevard, would be far fewer disruptions to traffic and area businesses. The new line would be set back from Interstate 5 to allow for future expansion of the interstate, and be elevated through most of the stretch.

The route does have its drawbacks. The fact that much of the route would be on elevated platforms presents challenges because the area has significant elevation changes between downtown Portland and the Tigard Triangle. Rail stations need relatively flat surfaces, which makes placement tricky.

While the Interstate 5 route would be cheaper to build, some savings would be offset by the number of bridges required. There would be bridges over Southwest 13th Avenue, Southwest 26th Avenue and Multnomah Boulevard.

“There is a cost difference,” Ford said. “It’s not so great that you are going to choose one or the other because of that.”

Section 3: Tigard Triangle to downtown Tigard

There are two options being considered for this connection.

Clinton Street:

This route would turn west on Southwest Clinton Street and use a bridge to cross Southwest Dartmouth Street and Oregon Route 217. Tracks would then cross Southwest Hall Boulevard and Pacific Highway into downtown Tigard.

The biggest drawback is that it would allow fewer stations than following Ash Avenue.

Ash Avenue:

A second option would follow Ash Avenue, then cross Oregon Route 217 on a shorter bridge to Southwest Hall Boulevard. This option would require fewer elevated lines, be less expensive and provide for more stations.

The drawback is that it would have “high-profile property impacts” on the surrounding area, according to Ford. Local businesses would be affected and downtown Tigard would be impacted substantially.

Section 4: Connecting to Bridgeport Village

Once the line reaches downtown Tigard, the question is how it will go to Bridgeport Village. Two options are on the table.

Branched route that would split at the Tigard Triangle:

One line would connect to Tigard. The other leg would connect to Bridgeport Village via Southwest 70th Avenue, using a separate bridge over Oregon Route 217, then run adjacent to Interstate 5.

The big advantage of the branched system is speed. It would cut travel time on the route by several minutes each way.

The disadvantages are greater cost, more complications and excessive service.

“You have to provide too much service through the shared portion of the route before the branch to Bridgeport begins,” Ford said. “You are providing double service in order to get that train to Bridgeport.”

TriMet personnel agree on the added difficulty.

“Branch service is more complex to operate,” said Leah Robbins, TriMet’s Southwest Corridor project director. “It requires more cost for that operation. That is difficult for TriMet to be behind.”

Route through Tigard

This would run to the Tigard Transit Center, using one of the options for reaching downtown Tigard, and then to Bridgeport Village beside freight rail tracks. The line would be relatively simple to operate, but would require TriMet to negotiate use of land adjacent to Union Pacific railroad tracks. TriMet worked out a similar agreement with the railroad when the orange line was built.

Another possibility under this option would be to run from Tigard to Tualatin on a route adjacent to Interstate 5. While it would avoid negotiations for land access, it would require more elevated track and likely cost more.

Summary

Environmental impact studies are being performed for all of the potential Southwest Corridor routes, and are expected to wrap up by 2019. Once a preferred route is selected, funding will present another challenge. The expansion could cost between $2.4 billion and $2.8 billion by the time it is completed in 2025. TriMet is considering putting a $1.7 billion bond on the ballot to cover its share, but federal funding would also be necessary.

“For all of the route options, we are looking forward to the years of operating it,” Robbins said. “We want a reliable, fast system that will work for opening day and 30 and 50 years beyond.”

The post Preparing to make new connections appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.