- Public:
- Tom Bioggo
- Virginia Costar
- Roger Cunningham
- Bill Dunaway
- Roger Fegles
- Violet Harding
- George Loftis
- Mary Malland
- Kathleen Sullivan
- Harlan Van Horn
- Jenny Velinty
- Sandi Young
|
|
|
|
1. Meeting begun at 7:02 p.m. by Jim Hansen. Hansen introduced Jason
Robertson as new project contact from Barney & Worth, Inc. Chair Tom
Kartrude was delayed by Port business.
4. Hansen and Dave Felstul provided technical presentation (agenda item #4). Felstul gave overview of information which included an explanation of the hydrologic process; rainfall data; climate trends; other parameters such as impervious surfaces, infiltration and evaporation; contours and conveyance system.
Hansen and Felstul pointed out that data models are merely approximations at this point and should not be considered final.
During the course of the technical presentation, a number of questions and issues arose. The following bullets approximate that dialogue:
- Dick Walker asked if the Munsel Creek area was shown on the consultants' maps. Felstul responded that Munsel Creek and other areas will be added to the base map in the future, both in terms of standing water and areas for draining.
- Questions arose regarding undersized pipes. Ken Lanfear responded that pipes are not undersized, but that because Munsel Creek is silting-in, it has begun to rise above the original pipe contours which has led to backflow.
- Bud Meyers asked if diagrams shown in the tech presentation would be made available to the committee. Hansen said Brown & Caldwell would provide them. Dave Franzen suggested diagrams would help the committee in their explanations to the public. Lanfear suggested stamping them in red to clarify that they are still drafts.
- Walker asked Felstul to talk about choke points at Munsel Creek Road. Said Florentine Estates are even worse off if one of the culverts becomes choked, and asked if consultants planned to work from the south up when developing a solution. Felstul wasn't sure yet.
- Hansen stated that the next steps would be to 1) calibrate the model with known problem areas; 2) complete a regulatory assessment technical memo; 3) look at ordinance and code development; 4) review development standards; 5) complete a financial assessment that looks at available funding mechnisms; and 6) draft recommendations. Walker asked if the consultants' plan was to come up with a set of proposals for the planning commission. Hansen said Brown & Caldwell would suggest recommendations to the City and the City would then take the plan through the planning commission. Hansen pointed out that the consultants' responsibility was to get the City started on an appropriate plan (i.e. not to the scale used in Portland), and that the City would then be responsible for moving ahead accordingly.
- Frank Williams asked how many of the "next steps" would be completed by the next meeting. Hansen said the committee could expect to see the final models, regulatory assessment and a treatment of code and ordinance issues by then. Work involving development standards and a financial assessment would be completed at a later date.
- Franzen asked if maps could be blown-up and superimposed with street-level detail so that the public could look at them and be able to tell whether or not their problem had been identified. Felstul said maps would include much more detail as work progressed. Franzen added that such a map would be an excellent starting tool, and would ensure that individual problems are not overlooked. All agreed.
- Kathleen Sullivan said she liked Franzen's idea, but suggested including on the map and models, areas that have yet to be built. Felstul said potential build out areas could be added and would be along with other layers of data. He reminded the committee that the maps and models being presented were still preliminary.
- Ray Street asked the engineers to consider future build out and the need to make sure water percolates in their search for a solution. Felstul said that would be done.
- Street asked if maps could be produced and where they could be viewed during non-work hours. Felstul suggested the library. Kartrude said the committee was responsible for displaying the maps. Hansen said the consultants could produce some large maps for the committee. Kartrude asked about cost. Hansen said some of it could be covered through technical assistance in the original contract. Felstul mentioned that data produced during the project would be made available on a CD ROM for future local use.
- Rob Ward asked when model refinements would be completed. Hansen said by next meeting if not sooner.
- Hansen asked if the City had received any feedback on them maps posted in the library. Lanfear said he had not yet posted the material, but planned to do it right away.
- More discussion ensued regarding maps that could be viewed and commented on by public. Hansen said he would have something put together by next meeting. Kartrude suggested having maps up by early September to have enough time for comment prior to the workshop. Hansen said workshop was scheduled for October 6.
3. Barney said the first newsletter would be mailed out in October, and that a draft would be provided to the committee for review. He also stated that October would be too soon for a workshop because people need time to absorb technical information. He suggested setting a date in November or early December instead. He thought a newsletter with a map attached might be helpful to the public as well. Ward said the committee needs to focus on showing solutions. Barney said the second newsletter would include a timeline to show the public when the committee expected to complete various stages of the project. Darrel Fields said people should be made aware of what they can expect, up to two more years of standing water in some cases. Kartrude asked what exactly a town hall workshop would consist of. Barney said it would be similar to a committee meeting, but that other community leaders would also be invited to attend.
Barney showed committee examples of newsletters and fact sheets. Questions about mailing frequency and cost came up with general agreement that a decision could be better made following distribution of the first newsletter. Kartrude asked Barney when the first newsletter would be sent out. Barney said a draft would be delivered to the committee at the September 1st meeting. Committee agreed to review and edit as necessary during the meeting to enable the final product to be mailed as soon as possible.
Ward asked Barney to describe the newsletter contents. Barney said it would focus on awareness, giving people an understanding of the project nature/scope; a discussion of the need/benefit (including cost); an explanation of the task force charge; and a timeline for major project milestones. All agreed the newsletter should be kept fairly short so people don't lose interest or throw it away. Barney suggested using a graphic to help display the nature of the problem. All agreed.
5. Kartrude opened the meeting for public comment. Sullivan requested increased opportunities for public participation. Kartrude said he would like to see that as well, but that during the early stages of the project, the task force's charge has been to learn the material and establish a smooth process. After this stage, meetings will allow more public involvement.
Sullivan suggested the committee not send out newsletters as newspaper inserts since many people throw them away without reading them. The suggestion was duly noted.
6. Kartrude closed the meeting at 8:50.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |