City Strategy At Odds With ODOT Plans

Last week there was an Oregon Transportation Committee meeting at Eagle Crest, with it's main focus on the Hwy 97 realignment. The city gave a long presentation of traffic studies and other data supporting its desire for a Cooley/97 interchange to allow further development at Juniper Ridge in the very near future.

To my surprise, the OTC has already, back in March, decided that they did not want any direct connection to Hwy 97 from Cooley Road. Their guidance document from March, 2008 states:

IV. Cooley Road - Preference is to include an overpass at Cooley Road and US 97, with no direct access to US 97.

This came as a complete and utter surprise to me. After all, we went through a several months-long process last year going over various scenarios for improving traffic flow at the Cooley/97 intersection. An idea that has been shelved, it seems.

In reality, the city's plans for Juniper Ridge are seen as a detriment to traffic flow on 97, and the OTC and ODOT have continued to press for surface solutions for Juniper Ridge and other local traffic in the area. Local roads for local traffic.

Simply put, the OTC and ODOT do not want Bend's proclivity for allowing development to exceed traffic flow capabilities, such as with the ProTerra development on the Mt. Bachelor bus parking lot, to cause their main north-south conduit east of the Cascades to fail.

I contacted the OTC to clarify this stance, and received this email from "ODOT Bob":

Bruce - I was asked to respond to your request. I've attached the slide from the presentation last week that references guidance that we received from the Transportation Commission during a presentation in February 2007. We have developed the alternatives for the US 97: North Corridor project consistent with this guidance, and we did not hear anything from the discussion last week that would cause us to change direction.

In fact, the traffic analysis accomplished as part of the project bears out the merits of the guidance at least as it pertains to the connection at Cooley Road. Any direct connection from US 97 at Cooley Road that would serve future development in Juniper Ridge causes the Parkway through Bend to fail. The traffic model shows that trips from throughout the community would use the Parkway as opposed to alternative local routes if their destination is Juniper Ridge. This additional local traffic volume would exceed the capacity.

Bob Bryant
Region Manager
ODOT Region 4

The emphasis is mine.

To my simple mind, it seems that the city is pushing ahead with plans that are at loggerheads with those who actually control the state's highways. And that is a no-win situation.

The Chair of the OTC stated that she supported funding of local arterials to take the pressure off of state highways. The idea being that state highways need free and clear flow, and local traffic is local traffic. Perhaps our city staff and council should explore this idea. Explore how to build a local traffic system that intersects with the state system on their terms. One that supports the local businesses and provides alternatives to the parkway.

One that might actually win support and funding from the state.

It might be an even better idea to try to really work with those who control highways 97 and 20, rather than continuing to push a homegrown solution against ever more fierce resistance.

Analysis of Juniper Ridge Tilt Towards Residential Uses

I've put together a table that shows how planned land uses at Juniper Ridge tilted heavily towards residential, and have pretty much stayed that way even though Allan Bruckner was quoted in the Bulletin as being happier that more land was to be used for employment purposes. The numbers denote acres:

Plan Developer	OTAK	JRP	C-R
R&D/LI	643	350	350-400
Office/Commercial	46	50	75-150
Residential	154	510	500-600
Mixed Use	75	75	75-150
University	154	200	175-235
Parks/OS	183	175	150-175
Roads/Facilities	245	140	125-150

Note that the R&D/Light Industrial land use of 350-400 acres in the C-R plan that was approved includes 100 acres for 10+ acre parcels. That's it. Les Schwab already has 12, with an option for 8 more. Suterra has formally requested 10 acres. Pepsi has informally requested 10 acres. At this rate large parcels will be gone in a year or two, unless the City ignores the master plan and continues to sell large plots.

This is exactly what the City seems to be doing in the case of the Suterra request. My next post will cover that-a 10 acre parcel adjacent to Les Schwab, either north or west. This overlays planned parcels of 2-4 acres. And I have questions about how the City is moving forward with this sale despite JRP's exclusive three-year option on the 50 acres surrounding the Les Schwab property. Are we setting ourselves up for another lawsuit?

To say nothing about the emergence of a possible new sales deal with JRP, which may or may not be discussed at tomorrow's City Council work session. While, at least publically--I suspect it will be discussed in Executive Session.

Just as a $3000 per trip Bend-taxpayer-funded "incentive" to help defray the $9000 per trip cost of temporarily fixing Cooley Rd was discussed in the last Executive Session, and is revealed in the letter to Suterra from Econ Dev Director John Russell. That is if ODOT can be bent over and twisted into agreeing with the City's plan to increase congestion at Cooley/97 just like they plan to do around Simpson and Columbia for Proterra's development of the Mt. Bachelor Bus Parking area, according to the BULL:

Bend roads compromise may pave way for similar agreements

A compromise agreement between the city of Bend and a developer over road improvements in southwest Bend could set an example for other areas of the city...

Proterra’s plans for a mixed-use project with condominiums, offices and retail space were shot down by a city hearings officer earlier this year because of the amount of traffic the project would add to nearby roads...

City officials agreed that at that latter two intersections, they would tolerate slightly more congestion in the near term as a result of the development’s traffic...

The compromise with Proterra — in which the city will not require full traffic improvements for new development, tolerating slightly more congestion instead — sets a new precedent...

By agreeing to the compromise, the city also believes it can pressure the Oregon Department of Transportation to do the same thing at Cooley Road and U.S. Highway 97.

ODOT has said no new construction can happen near that intersection - including at the city’s 1,500-acre Juniper Ridge development - unless the city comes up with $40 million to upgrade the intersection.

Instead, the city is trying to reach an agreement with ODOT that would allow slightly more congestion at the intersection, which is most clogged during the morning and evening rush hours.

Mayor Bruce Abernethy and Councilor Bill Friedman agreed at Monday’s meeting that the city’s move to allow more congestion on its streets would put it in a better position to convince ODOT to do the same thing.

So the Council is saying "we like screwing over our own citizens, would you please do so, too!"

Just what we Bend citizen's want--even more congestion in the name of developer subsidies. Right. I bet you agree with that, kind reader. Just a little more "temporary" congestion in front of Lowe's on 97 during rush hour.

To be continued...

Sources for plans:
OTAK 8/05

Juniper Ridge Partners (JRP) 5/2/07

Cooper-Robertson, approved by City Council 7/16/08

Junper Ridge Master Plan Only Saves 100 Acres For 10+ Acre Plots

All that talk about how Juniper Ridge is going to save Bend by being a place where larger employers can have a place for facilities covering 10 acres or more?

Yep, it's just talk. The final Juniper Ridge Master Plan, approved by the City Council on July 16, has only 100 acres set aside for large plots. That's awfully little, considering Les Schwab already has 20, Pepsi wants 10, and two more companies are stated to want 10 each.

I brought this up in public comments before the vote and Mayor Abernethy chastised me, stating the Council is very aware of the need for jobs, and that private landowners just outside Juniper Ridge will provide the necessary land.

He must know something I don't.

The old OTAK master plan that the Council deemed not good enough set aside 500 acres for large plots. Considering the paucity of such land in Bend, that makes a hell of a lot more sense. Especially considering up to 750 acres are being set aside for residential uses.

So someone tell me--where are the employers that will provide well-enough paying jobs to buy houses on that 750 acres be able to set up shop?

Please Support Stifled Unions

http://www.tsweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2777&Itemid=71

Buying a Bulletin Ad Is Tough for Union

Bend’s Only Daily Newspaper must be so flush with advertising dollars that it can afford to be really picky about what ads it accepts – at least if they come from the union representing Bend Area Transit bus drivers.

Back in mid-April, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 757 tried to place an ad in The Bulletin urging the city not to raise BAT fares or cut service to cope with its budget crunch. The ad also claimed there is a “gross disparity in wages and benefits between BAT workers and every other city worker.”

The union originally wanted the ad to run on Tuesday, April 15, to publicize a press conference and rally to be held at Bend City Hall the next day. But when Catharine Alexander of the union submitted the ad to Bulletin account executive Lisa Legg, she was told the contents had to be vetted by the paper’s higher-ups before it could be printed.

“I sent your ad for approval to our management, who would like you to provide a back up for the claims in the ad,” Legg wrote to Alexander April 10 in an e-mail provided to The EYE.

Alexander responded by sending some supporting documents. Shortly afterward Legg e-mailed: “For each claim in the ad, we will need to know what page of the information you sent over pertains to that particular claim. We do not know how to look through each page and decide what goes with what.”

The next morning, Legg asked if the ad could run on Wednesday instead of Tuesday. “Can we still get Tuesday?” Alexander responded. “I can possibly get it in late, pending approval from management,” Legg replied.

But later that day, Legg e-mailed: “I just spoke to Sean Tate, our advertising manager, and Jay Brandt, our advertising director. They would both need to review every page of the documents that you sent, which wouldn’t be possible in time to run the ad. We would be happy to run an ad inviting people to come to the Press Conference and Rally.”

Alexander next asked Legg if Tate and Brandt could review the ad in time to get it into the Wednesday paper. Legg told her they wouldn’t be able to review it until Monday, when they both would be “on the road, which means we’d miss the deadline for Wednesday as well.”

Alexander then wrote that “we’re thinking the contents of the ad are timeless,” so it could run after Wednesday. She asked again when the ad could run.

Legg responded that “once our directors have gone over and approved the content of the ad, then we can get it put in the paper. If they approve it Monday while they are on the road we could get it in for Thursday.”

But as of April 21, Legg was telling Alexander that her “manager” – Tate, presumably – still wanted more corroboration: “He said that we will require verification of your information and not a list of phone numbers and people to call.”

The Bulletin still hasn’t published the union’s ad. But on April 28 it did publish an ad from Paratransit Services, the Bremerton, WA-based private company that operates BAT, attacking “the Portland union” for allegedly being uncooperative in negotiations.

And on April 20, it published an editorial calling the BAT drivers’ demand for a pay raise “astonishing.”

By April 21, Alexander apparently was getting exasperated. “The Union has placed similar ads in the Eugene Register Guard, the Corvallis newspaper, the Grants Pass newspaper and the Salem newspaper without having to prove anything,” she e-mailed Legg. “This has been true even when the editorial page has been against the Union’s position. If the publisher of the Bulletin doesn’t want to take our ad for political purposes the publisher certainly has that right. But the publisher should say so.”

Although I don't agree with the demand for an immediate raise, I do agree we need a transit system.

Public Safety Staffing May Be Cut To 05/06 Levels

In a subdued meeting with much tallk about layoffs and not filling job openings, the most disconcerting news in the April 14 Bend City Council Work Session on department by department budget cuts were the proposed staffing cuts at the Police and Fire Departments.

This was so troubling to the City Council that they decided to move $100,000 from the Mirror Pond restoration fund to the Fire Department to ensure that all six stations remain open at all times, at least for the forthcoming fiscal year. Even then, Fire Chief Larry Langston stated that "two out of three days, we are out of EMS units for ambulance runs at some point during the day".

Police staffing is also going to be cut, both through not filling current openings and by not filling two openings created by expected retirements this summer. This should not affect call responses or violent crime investigations, but will affect the clearance rate for property and other low-level crimes. It is also expected to affect the budget due to reductions in traffic and other fines.

The complete elimination of Code Enforcement was proposed. Street maintenance is to be cut from $1.7 million to $700,000. The snowplow budget will be reduced to $150,000, in the hope that next winter will not require the $550,000 worth of plowing that this winter did. Transit cuts were proposed to eliminate Sunday Dial-A-Ride service and some mid-day fixed routes, along with bus stop improvements like benches, garbage cans, and shelters. The UGB process will be delayed, and there is concern that if the City is sued over the UGB there may not be enough money for legal defense services. Accessibility projects will see staff cut from six to three. The Affordable Housing budget will go from a proposed $2.1 million to $1.1 million. Engineering will be cut 40%, delaying transportation and utility improvement projects.

The Planning Department is being hit especially hard, as it is fee-based with supporting revenues from permits. Unfortunately, the residential permit level has dropped into the basement, and it turns out that the residential permits had been supporting the commercial permits all along. Department Director Mel Oberst stated commercial permit fees have never been high enough to cover required planning and inspection services, as commercial buildings are much more complex. The General Fund has been tapped to help pay for these services.

Reserves are being decimated, with most departments to only carry 1.5 to 2 months of reserves, while Transit will only maintain two weeks of reserves.

The "winners" seem to be the Community Development and Economic Development Departments, along with the Juniper Ridge and Airport Improvement projects. Both these departments are seeing year-over-year increases in monies from the General Fund, while the General Fund will be tapped to cover $250,000 in debt service for the Airport Improvements, and another $180,000 in debt service for the Juniper Ridge improvements required for the Les Schwab project. Both of these debts do not currently have a stable funding source for repayment.

City staff will return soon with specific immediate cuts, and also plans to revisit the subject in September, with further cuts possible depending on the economic situation going forward.

The residents of Bend will see a definite drop in services, from filling potholes to enforcing the sign ordinances, as the City battens down the hatches in the face of the oncoming recession.

All hopes hang on selling land this fall

Following the City Council meeting this evening, a Work Session focused on budget cutting, I talked to Finance Director Sonia Andrews. We discussed the amount of funding going towards JR from the General Fund, which she stated as $180,000 for debt service on a line of credit to cover our obligations per Les Schwab. All potential cuts in the JR budget as presented last fall have been undertaken. We are still waiting on ODOT for a number of trips that can possibly result in land sales this fall.

Ms. Andrews characterized the City's position as "crossing their fingers" in hope of everything working out. If not, it's dead in the water for now, and the City is paying debt service on the $6 million we will end up in the hole until things turn around. Ron Garzini and, to a lesser extent, John Russell are the rainmakers. Ms. Andrews even admitted that even if the trips are OKed, she has no idea where the money to fund the $40 million Cooley/97 interchange will come from. That's on the Garz/Russell plate.

In a realistic aside, Ms. Andrews stated that even if they can sell 50 acres for only $5 a square foot, half of the $10 that Russell is promoting, but far more realistic for undeveloped land considering Les Schwab paid $7 for shovel ready with no SDC's, that she is off the hook because that $10 million will pay for costs incurred.

There was very little discussion of Juniper Ridge at the actual meeting. Much more time was spent on saving a $100K here or there, than on the big parts of the budget. My guess is that if the voters don't decide to fund the transit system this fall, it's gone. Capell and Telfer already question it's priority, especially considering the deep cuts to public safety.

But strangely, no one questions the developers subsidies through unrealistically low SDC's and permit fees, which has led us to this point. Growth has simply not paid for itself. Councilor Clinton is the only one who even brought this up.

Low SDC's and permit fees-->Planning/Engineering/Road/Utility deficits-->General Fund hits-->Public Safety cutbacks

As an example, consider the city of Troutdale. Per their SDC worksheet, a one-ERU residential hookup costs $4426, while according to the Bend worksheet, a one ERU hookup to the sewer is only $2038. Is Bend's cost really less than half of Troutdale's? Or are Bend taxpayers picking up the difference for the developer?

A Public "Mea Culpa" To Mark Capell

I recently filed a complaint with the Oregon State Ethics Commission regarding City Councilor Mark Capell and his votes on issues regarding Knife River Corp. and President, Todd Taylor, Mark's cousin. Mark's mother and Todd's mother are sisters, as Mark informed me Wednesday.

This was in error, as it is completely legal to vote this way. Oregon state law does not consider a cousin to be a relative in this regard. To quote the Oregon Revised Statutes on the definition of a "relative":

ORS 244.020 (14)(d) Siblings, spouses of siblings or parents of the public official or of the public official's spouse

So cousin's are fine, while in-law's are not.

Sorry, Mark.