TPAC minutes from October 3, 2018

 

Present: Nathan Clarke, John Tydlaska, Kate Merrill, Juliana Lukasik, Brandon Wentworth, Michelle Sprague, Ryan Hashagan, Ken Wilson, Susan Pearce, Julie Bennett, Michael Zokoych, Chris Armes, Anthony Stohl, Todd Deneffe, Rina Jimmerson.

 

ADOPTION OF AUGUST TPAC MINUTES – JTydlaska proposed to approve the minutes, NClarke seconded.  Committee approved.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT – none

 

CEID PARKING ASSESSMENT AND PERMIT ANALYSIS – Owen Ronchelli

 

ORonchelli presents the updated PPT showing the same recommendations presented last time, but this version maps where the affects stalls are – a request from the last TPAC meeting.

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

 

1. There are still 1 Hour stalls in the system (12 in sample zones).

Solution:  Identify all 1 Hour stalls and convert to 2 Hour

 

2. There are still No Limit stalls outside the buffer zone (54 in sampled zones)

Solution: Identify all No Limit stalls outside the buffer zone and convert to time limit appropriate to location.

 

3. 2 Hour (signed) stalls have violation rate of over 40%. 2 Hour (metered) stalls have violation rate of 16%.  Peak occupancy is 82% vs. 61% respectively.

Solution:  Convert all 2 Hour (signed) to 2 Hour (metered).

 

4. There are still 1 Hour stalls in the system (12 in sample zones).

Solution:  Identify all 1 Hour stalls and convert to 2 Hour

 

5. There are still No Limit stalls outside the buffer zone (54 in sampled zones)

Solution: Identify all No Limit stalls outside the buffer zone and convert to time limit appropriate to location.

 

6. 2 Hour (signed) stalls have violation rate of over 40%. 2 Hour (metered) stalls have violation rate of 16%.  Peak occupancy is 82% vs. 61% respectively.

Solution:  Convert all 2 Hour (signed) to 2 Hour (metered) and to continue to improve enforcement.

 

7. Permit Systems Allocations (recommendation)

 

Peak hour demand in 2 Hour OBP stalls is 94%  (G and N Zones).

Total Permits currently (2018) allocated:     6,753

• G Zone: 4,969 (74%)
• N Zone: 1,726 (25%)
• Grandfather residential:             58 (1%)

 

Estimated permits to be reduced (from 6,753)

            as a strategy to lower peak occupancy in 2 Hour

            OBP stalls from 94% to 84%.                         695

• • Recommended 2019 Allocation (FTE)                       6,058 @ .60 vs.70 (2018)
  • G Zone:                                                            4,483 (74%)
  • N Zone:                                                            1,575  (25%)
  • Grandfather residential                                  58 (1%)

 

 

DISCUSSION POINTS:

 

KWilson – asks about the financial impacts

MSprague – how close are these spots to transit lines? Also, wanting to know if we can choose the type of meters that are put in

CArmes- the City is moving towards license plate meters

JTydlaska – why not change 2 hour signed parking to permit parking instead of meters

JBennett and KMerrill – it is hard enough for N as it is, – we need to think about this aspect.

 

 

CCIM PARKING LOSS ANALYSIS- Owen Ronchelli

 

• 285 stalls would be affected
• 13 loading zones would be affected
• 19 transit zones would be affected

 

SCohen suggests that we focus on CCIM bundle #9 because it is included in the first 1-5yr phase of the projects.

JLukasik – agrees but says we need to look at the impacts from all the projects because all are at Council for adoption

 

 

 

 

2018 Bundle 9 Use Characteristics (Data Collected from 7:00 AM – 7:00 PM)

Use Characteristics	All Users	Non-Permit Users	Permit Users
Unique vehicle trips	204	139	65
Vehicle hours parked	747	274	473
Permits displayed in OBP – Zone G stalls during peak hour[1]	N/A	N/A	37
Permits displayed in OBP – Zone N stalls during peak hour	N/A	N/A	12
Permits displayed in non-OBP stalls during peak hour	N/A	N/A	3
Remaining vehicles without a permit displayed during peak hour	31	31	N/A

 

Highlights of the discussion on Bundle 9:

• The occupancy rate is 77 % – so the potentially lost parking spots are important stalls
• There are no metered stalls on 7^th
• SPearce – Bikes and trucks should be separate
• KMerrill – Frieght committee also believes that bike and freight should be separated. The Freight committee has asked Gabe Graff to review the option of 6^th again
• SPearce – freight should be on 7^th and bikes should be on 11^th and 12^th
• SLindsay – very little support for narrowing 11^th and 12^th

 

*All bundles are in the documents received by members.

 

ADJOURN

 

 

 

 

[1] The peak hour utilization is based on the 2018 area wide CEID on-street data collection 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM result.

 

 

TPAC minutes from October 24, 2018

 

Present: Ken Wilson, Michael Bolliger, Dan Yates, Kate Merrill, Deane Funk, Brandon Wentworth, Tina McNerthy, Peter Finley-Fry, Juliana Lukasik, Michelle Sprague, John Tydlaska, Ryan Hashagen, Julie Bennett, Michael Zokoych, Nathan Clarke, Chris Armes, Brad Malsin, Scott Cohen, Susan Pearce.

 

Guests: Brad Malsin, Sandra Constock

 

ADOPTION OF AUGUST TPAC MINUTES – MZokoych proposed to approve the minutes, JBennett seconded.  Committee approved.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT – none

 

PRESENTATION ON PARKING ENFORCEMENT IN THE CEID – Donald Hunter and Mike Crebs

 

CEID Enforcement

January 1, 2018 through October 19, 2018

 

(CEID APP Zone G and N):

Citations Issued:    4817     (541 APP Citations)

Warnings:               2039

Timings:                12189     (Vehicles)

Excused Cites:            86

 

(CEID Metered Locations):

Citations Issued:    4369

Warnings:                 991               

Timings:                  4503    (Vehicles)

Excused Cites:         116

 

TOTAL CITATIONS: 9,186                 TOTAL WARNINGS: 3,030

TOTAL Timings: 16,692             TOTAL Excused Citations: 202

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Citations issued in CEID:

2016: 9,200      2017: 9,925    2018: 9,186 (Through 10-19-2018)

 

Highlights :

• Many vehicles have Zone G permits but are parked in time stay zones
• People are over staying in the time stay zones
• If we increase enforcement, it will most likely be employees and residents
• Hours of enforcement are 8-6 Monday to Friday
• Suggestion was made to send information about increased enforcement and promote the TDM to all permit holders
• Suggestion was made to set up a sub-committee to discuss enforcement further

 

DISCUSSION ON THE NEXT STEPS OF PARKING ASSESSMENT AND PERMIT ANALYSIS REPORTS FROM RICK AND OWEN – facilitated by Chris Armes

 

– Focus on permit analysis

– How to decrease permits and go from .7 FTE to .6 FTE which we want to continue the conversation to hit the target of 6000 permits

– one way is to hard cap of .6FTE and the other is price – are the two ways to reduce permits

DYates – this was done without the CCIM and the loss of the 250 parking spots

RHashagen – TPAC is not charging a market rate, a rate similar to Trimet should be considered

KMerrill – worried about employees and low wage earners

CArmes- Option is to add meters

KMerrill – Staff will do investigations and make recommendations at the next meeting

JTydlaska- need to try not to put the burden on employees

RHashagen – permits don’t allow clients to park, consider a rate that is more comparable to a TriMet rate

Discussion ensues on pricing…

MBolliger – tables the discussion on pricing for the moment

JTydlaska- time stays is for clients,

CArmes – the goal is to have an open face on a block face- only sell enough permits, to have space for a permit holder or a customer

JLukasik – not necessarily black and white and create a program to help families in need.  Raising the price is good as long as we create a program to help those who cannot afford

CArmes- one thing TPAC did last time – you increased the permit rates every year for 3 years, so people could plan ahead for it.  If the cost is going to be an impact and you want to offset with a program, PBOT does not have the tools to administer a program to review tax forms.  TPAC would have to be responsible for it.

CArmes – right now there is the opt-out option for a permit which TPAC could continue to do that as opposed to rewarding people just once for not getting a permit by using surcharge funds for that

KMerrill – is there a way to find out if employees or if it is employers that are paying for it

CArmes – unfortunately not because we give them to employers.  PBOT needs a recommendation from TPAC  by January so to allow PBOT to prepare.

 

NEW CHAIR, Mr. Deane Funk, is introduced as Mike Bolliger’s replacement starting in 2019.

 

Scott Cohen from CCIM introduces a slide on PARKING MITIGATION STRATEGY

DYATES – how many of the strategies are presently allowed?

SCohen- all are allowed but depends on the locations, for instance, OMSI location requires a zoning change

JLukasik – OMSI and ODOT parking is just temporary

 

SCohen asks for a letter of support for CCIM as PBOT has been very engaged with TPAC

 

Motion to write a letter of support is put on the table by Ryan Hashagen and seconded by Nathan Clarke.

 

Many committee members share the following points:

• TPAC concerns have not been addressed
• HAND will not be writing a letter and not going to Council
• Most concerned about with 7^th, 11^th and 12^th
• Freight and bikes should be on different streets
• Train is an issue for 11^th and 12^th
• Green loop not defined

 

KMerrill- TPAC will not be able to come to a consensus as we are not able to endorse all projects

 

Motion for a letter in support of CCIM is denied by majority – Ryan Hashagen in favor and Tina McNerthey abstained.

All members recognized Scott Cohen’s contribution to TPAC and their appreciation for his efforts, updates and continued attendance.

 

 

TPAC minutes from November 28, 2018

 

Present: Michelle Sprague, Tina McNerthey, Susan Lindsay, Juliana Lukasik, Julie Bennett, Michael Bolliger, Michael Zokoych, Susan Pearce, Kristan Alldrin, Chris Armes, John Tydlaska, Nathan Clark, Ken Wilson, Ryan Hashagen, Kate Merrill, Rina Jimmerson

 

Guests: Dan Bower, Michael L. Tevis, Doug Hadesty, Peter Stark

 

ADOPTION OF AUGUST TPAC MINUTES – JTydlaska proposed to approve the minutes, NClarke seconded.  Committee approved.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT – Michael Tevis asks about illegal parking.

 

PORTLAND STREETCAR UPDATE – DAN BOWER

• 5 trains are out of service so the trains are running every 19 minutes instead of every 14 minutes
• Talks about BAT lanes, would like to include freight in these lanes but needs to work on a definition of what freight is.
• KMerrill – TPAC is already in discussions with CCIM on the subject
• Portland Streetcar is working on a service expansion at the cost $370 000 in the NW with a terminus at Montgomery Park. This would add significant service to the Eastside as well.
• Streetcar ridership is up 10 % in the Eastside
• TPAC is going to change their promotion on the Streetcar that they sponsor to advertise the CEIC Water Avenue Courtesy Shuttle.

 

ADVISORY BODY CHANGES  – CHRIS ARMES

• CArmes highlights a few changes like : there is now a maximum of 8 years to sit on a committee, members must follow an on-line training, e-mails/correspondence is now subject to public records, watch out for conflicts of interest.
• She will forward the information to KMerrill and Rjimmerson in the new Year

 

DISCUSSION ON NEXT STEPS OF PARKING ASSESSMENT AND PERMIT ANALYSIS WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND PRICING SUGGESTIONS and ENFORCEMENT SUB-COMMITTEE UPDATE – KEN WILSON/RYAN HASHAGE

 

What was presented and discussed:

4 CEID PERMIT SCENARIOS

1 – Follow Rick and Owen recommendations and reduce both zones N and G to .6FTE

2 – Reduce zone G to .6FTE and keep zone N at .7FTE

3 – Increase permit price to $350 1^st year, $400 2^nd year and $450 3^rd year)

4 – Increase price and reduce eligibility

• Discussion about better enforcement that has begun and MBolliger states that because we have no data on the increased enforcement there is no need to change anything. Increased enforcement will open up more parking stalls.
• MZokoych suggests a motion to do nothing at this time and to only review this after we have data on increased enforcement which would be at the end of 2019.
• RHashagen – expresses that there are too many issues and too many permits that are being sold. Would like to use the revenue to offset the wallet and so, he suggests that we increase the rate of parking and bring it to $370.
• MBolliger suggests that this be added as a fifth option to the suggested 4 scenarios
• KMerrill reminds the committee that average wage in the CEID is $50 000 while downtown it is $75 000.
• MBolliger agrees with MZokoych that until we increase enforcement, it is hard to make a decision
• CArmes adds that people who buy a permit should be able to find a stall
• JTydlaska says that people are not finding stalls because they are clogged up with overstayers that need to get out of here
• KWilson- if we increase enforcement, we should inform/notify permit holders through their companies
• Rhashagen- need to get people out of their cars. If TPAC increases the rates, it allows for more money to be offered for alternatives
• MBolliger- TPAC needs to separate the two issues: the overall intent of the plan is to make the cost of a permit more relative, so it makes sense to raise the cost of a permit.
• KMerrill – reminds TPAC that we will be losing more parking now that CCIM has been adopted
• MZokoych- adds to “increase the price of permits” to his original motion
• SLindsay – prefers no increase in permit and make no changes
• Rhashagen proposes a motion to increase the permit price by $70 per year for the next three years and no reductions.
• Motion is proposed by RHashagen, seconded by KWilson and unanimously adopted.
• New pricing will be set at $370 for 2019, $440 for 2020 and $510 for 2021 while we continue to look into improving the TDM Wallet.

 

METERED PARKING DISCUSSION:

KMerrill, JBennett and Rjimmerson propose the following list:

1 – North Block on Alder between SE 6^th and Grand (3 -4 stalls)

2 – South Block on Alder between 6^th and Grand (2 stalls)

3 – East face of 6^th between SE Stark and Oak (3-4 stalls)

4 – West face of 6^th between SE Stark and Oak (2 stalls)

5 – South Side of Oak between Grand and 6th (7-17 stalls)

6 –  SE Washington between 2^nd and Water (5-6 stalls)

7 – SE Alder between 2^nd and 3^rd on the Southside (2 stalls)

8 – SE Clay between 2^nd and 3^rd on the Northside (7-17)

^*Reminder

^{TOTAL STALLS =    4 018}

^{STALLS IN ZONE G = 3 264}

^{STALLS IN ZONE N =    754}

RHashagen – is there a limit to the number of meters we TPAC can install?

CArmes- in the past, TPAC has always done 50 block faces per year

SLindsay- feels TPAC should not transfer all timestays to meters

RHashagen – suggests looking at Burnside Bridgehead because people are using N and G permits and parking all day long.  Also, Davis between MLK and 3^rd, no turnover at all.

KMerrill – adds that there is a lot of construction right now

JKLukasik- historically TPAC has done things in a certain way ie. 50 block faces per year.  Suggests we try for 75 this year.

Committee agrees to do just 50 block faces again this year

JTydlaska- we should look at meters on the West side of MLK

MBolliger- if meters are clustered, they are easier to enforce

CArmes- the parking meters come from Sweden.  PBOT is adding 200 meters to the Northwest, TPAC could add our request to that order

Motion to order 25 meters to cover 50 block faces is proposed by NClark and seconded by JBennett, committee votes in favor by a majority.

Committee agrees to review 50 block faces at the next TPAC meeting in January, 2019.

 

TPAC minutes from January 23, 2019 – ADOPTED

 

Present: Susan Pearce, Chris Armes, Ken Wilson, Dan Yates, Tina McNerthney, Michelle Sprague, Ryan Hashagen, Michael Zokoych, Julie Bennett, Susan Lindsay, Rina Jimmerson

Guests: Jeff McAnally, Doug Hardesty, Roger Geller, Todd DeNeffe, Lee Leighton

 

ADOPTION OF NOVEMBER TPAC MINUTES – Motion to approve minutes – Ryan Hashagen seconded by Julie Bennett. Committee approved.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT – none

 

ADVISORY BIKE LANES ON SE 2^ND AND 3^RD – ROGER GELLER

• RGeller shows image and explains that bike advisory lanes are basically lanes for bikes but cars can use them as well. Other options include: greenways, bike lanes or shared roadway, none of which are a good idea for the CEID.
• RHashagen adds that they are for both cyclists and pedestrians alike and points out that there are no sidewalks on 3^rd so this space would be a positive thing for pedestrians too.
• The committee has lots of questions: how will drivers know they can use these lanes ?, do these lanes effect parking/ loading because the data collection being used is 20 years old? , can two trucks pass?
• RGeller explains that the use of the lanes by cars will be automatic and there will be an education campaign. He will review the project with more recent data and come back to TPAC. As for the question regarding trucks, he says that the width of the road now will remain the same. He also, states that the focus of these lanes, for now, is for 3^rd
• MZkoych and DYates are concerned that with these lanes on 3^rd it will encourage cyclists to speed and it would become a race track.
• LLeighton asks if there is any observational comments from areas that have tried this ?
• RGeller will bring North American examples
• DYates expresses concern for the lack of lighting in that area

 

CEIC WATER AVENUE COURTESY SHUTTLE RIDERSHIP UPDATE – RINA JIMMERSON & JEFF MCANALLY

Shuttle Ridership from July,2018 to December 2019

WEEK	NUMBER OF RIDERS
1	11
2	11
3	14
4	33
5	25
6	29
7	37
8	32
9	30
10	59
11	40
12	37
13	49
14	47
15	58
16	59
17	45
18	58
19	48
20	47
21	63 – DECEMBER
22	48

• Rjimmerson explains the basic data (see table above). Shuttle ridership has been steadily increasing.  Since week #12, ridership has never gone below 45.  The CEIC has exhausted all advertising options (within budget constraints).  We are hoping that the new Burnside stop increases ridership.  The new postcard announcing the two new stops has been delivered along Water Avenue and the shuttle route.  We have asked TriMet for help in identifying criteria to help TPAC evaluate if it should be a continued service.  Other options would be to: advertise on the Streetcar, organize a scavenger hunt, offer incentive coupons, make a connection with Bike Town.
• JMcAnally – shows new scenarios that could allow the shuttle to run all day (see below) and detailed/granular ridership for October and November 2018.

RHashagen – asks for more data because from what he sees, there is less than 1 rider per hour for the month of October.  Would like the annual ridership to date.

JMcAnnally – will provide for next meeting

To be re-discussed

PARKING METER INSTALLATION SUGGESTIONS

Committee agrees on the general areas for new meters but would like a map that superimposes the suggestions for new meters and with a map of where meters already exist to make a final decision.

To be provided at the next TPAC meeting.

STUDY AREA FOR DATA COLLECTION – CHRIS ARMES

TPAC agrees to keep the same study area as last year because it makes the data more valuable with changes to approx. 6 blocks ex. remove 7^th because of CCIM and include a part of the area where there is heavy retail around Ankeny, 10^th, 11^th and 12^th (there is a micro-economy that is there that needs turnover). CArmes will provide a new map with the suggested changes for final decision at next TPAC meeting.

PBOT BAC AND LIVABLE STREETS – RYAN HASHAGEN

The committee was asked to comment the city budget but they had not received a copy.  Last week, the committee voted unanimously to send a letter to city council that says PBOT BAC committee can’t comment because they don’t have a copy.  The strategy is to look for additional points of leverage and send several separate letters during the budget process instead of a single letter.

 

TPAC minutes from March 6^th, 2019 – ADOPTED-

 

Present: Deane Funk, Kate Merrill, Michael Zokoych, Dan Yates, Ryan Hashagen, Susan Pearce, Nathan Clark, Tina McNerthney, Michelle Sprague, Susan Lindsay, Chris Armes, Rina Jimmerson

Guests: Chris Mathieu, Doug Allred, Sarah Goforth, Tony, Jordan, Doug Hardesty, Peter Finley-Fry

 

ADOPTION OF JANUARY TPAC MINUTES – no quorum at beginning – kept for next meeting

 

PUBLIC COMMENT – TJordan expresses that he is in favor of the TDM Wallet and suggests TPAC invest more resources into the program.

 

PBOT PROPOSAL FOR TDM CHANGES – SARAH GOFORTH

SGoforth explains that thanks to the success of the Transportation Wallet, specifically the opt outs, which brought a 13% reduction in issued parking permits in 2018, PBOT proposes three efforts to continue further reduction in permits for the upcoming permit year:

 

• Removing the opt out limit of Transportation Wallets (currently 20 per business)
• Adding an additional $100 in TriMet fare to the Hop card 3-6 months after its received
• Providing an additional $25 in car2go driving credit 3-6 months after it was originally issued

 

The use of TPAC’s remaining funds could be used to support fewer car trips and will increase parking supply and decrease congestion in the district. At a minimum, each of these projected 850 opt-outs, with the added “opt-out bonus”, would contribute to 40 more TriMet trips and a handful of car2go trips.  This is over 35,000 personal vehicle trips saved with just this “bonus” alone.

 

The additional budget request is $128,700.

 

Motion to approve is put forth by RHashagen and seconded by SPearce.  Unanimously adopted.

 

CEIC WATER AVENUE COURTESY SHUTTLE RIDERSHIP DISCUSSION AND UPDATE – RINA JIMMERSON

Rjimmerson highlights some points from the documents sent to TPAC:

• Best ridership was in January 2018 with 153 passengers
• Most used stops from highest to lowest are : 1 – Eastside Exchange Building 2- ODOT Block 3- Dairy Building 4 – Convention Center 5 – OMSI 6 – Oregon Rail Heritage 7 – Smith Tea (recently added) 8 – Subaru of Portland (recently added)
• Rjimmerson explains the problem with Subaru of Portland is that the building is vacant which explains zero pick-ups
• At the last TPAC meeting, RHashagen was worried that there were days where the shuttle ran all day for only one person.
• Rjimmerson explains that that was true at the beginning like in July, August and September but has changed since. EX. For the month of October – only 2 days when one person rode the shuttle. In November there was only one day that only two people rode the shuttle, the other days were between 4 and 16 per day. In December, it was slower due to the holidays so no one rode the week of 17^th to the 25^th.  In January, only one day when there were only 2 people on the shuttle but it was our best month with 153 riders.
• Rjimmerson explains that we are trying to get help from TriMet on deciding factors to be able to evaluate if we should continue. CArmes is also trying to get some info about that via PBOT.
• KMerrill and DFunk explain that there is a possible grant that will soon be offered to make the shuttle electric and autonomous. This would have a huge impact.
• KMerril also explains that CEIC is working with major employers like Autodesk and OMSI to identify improvements. Furthermore, real estate developers in the area have sent us the following information: Within blocks of the Shuttle’s route you will find completed or in progress over $300  in million in new development  and investment much of which is geared towards creating spaces for significant job creation.  Many iconic local Portland companies such as Steve Smith Tea; Salt and Straw; House Spirits and Stumptown Coffee along with larger corporate commitments by Autodesk and Sanofi have created over 700 jobs on or within blocks of the route of the shuttle.  This will continue in the short terms as there is over 300,000 sf of new creative office under construction that when occupied will add up to an additional 1000 new employees to the area and in the longer term with the coming redevelopment of the ODOT Blocks and OMSI’s campus in the years ahead. With this much density of employment in such a concentrated area has come continued pressure on a diminishing supply of parking and need for more flexibility and transit options for employees.
• RHashagen – understands that metrics are trying to be identified but is concerned about the budget in that for every person that rides the shuttle, TPAC could provide a TriMet pass. Would like to see an effective return on TPAC investment.
• TMcNerthney explains that that area is part of the new “opportunity zones” which will see a lot of development
• NClark – suggests reaching out to Columbia Gorge Express and OHSU about their shuttles.
• TPAC agrees that this discussion should continue
• Rjimmerson reminds everyone that the shuttle is obliged to stop in parking lots because it is not allowed to use the right of way for stops.

 

CCIM COMMITTEE DISCUSSION – PETER FINLEY-FRY

PFinley-Fry explains that streets need to be designed to support a budding land use. Street are classified by the City according to their function but now they have new uses.  In the CCIM process, TPAC got two things : 1- recognition that loading docks are important and 2 – the commitment for a working group, which would look at street design.  The street designs needs to focus on making streets wider, 60ft right of way is too small.  Asks TPAC to look at the working group as an opportunity.  Encourages everyone to apply to be on the committee.

• DYates – the first CCIM process was not a good one
• PFinley-Fry – this is our chance to repair that process
• SPearce – trust in PBOT is low right now, not just because of the CCIM process
• Rjimmerson- the application for the working group has been sent to all TPAC members, deadline to apply is March 21, 2019

 

PARKING MASTER PLAN DISCUSSION – RINA JIMMERSON

Rjimmerson explains that the RFP went out on February 1 with a deadline for submitting a Notice of Interest ending on February 13th.  Not having received enough variety in the applicants to properly address this RFP which has been a major project for the TPAC, so the RFP was published a second time with a deadline extension until February 22, 2019.  In the meantime, outreach was made to EcoNorthwest, Tiberius, Kittelson, SERA, OTAK, Shiels Obletz and Alta.

RHashagen – surprised that the RFP was not discussed at TPAC.

Rjimmerson – explains that it had been an ongoing discussion for months and was in the MOU.  Invited all members of TPAC to sit on the selection committee.  To view the RFP, see : http://www.ceic.cc/wp-content/uploads/CEIC-Parking-Master-Plan-RFP-Version-REPUBLISHED-February-22-2019.pdf

 

OMSI FLASHING LIGHT – KATE MERRILL – Installation has been delayed, it is now planned for this summer.  Ongoing discussions are taking place to speed up the process.

 

PBOT BAC AND LIVABLE STREETS UPDATE – RYAN HASHAGEN – The city has mandated all departments to redo their budgets.

 

SAFETY FOR ALL AND CLEAN START – KATE MERRILL – Announces that the ESD was unanimously adopted by Council.  The CEIC is now preparing to send out RFIs instead of RFPs which makes the process more accessible to grassroots and non-profits to apply.

 

CEIC BANNERS UPDATE –  KATE MERRILL – CEIC is in the process of applying to PGE and the City for use of poles.  They are almost ready.  Should be up in April 2019.

 

ADJOURN