Board Minutes – February 23, 2009

Comments Off on Board Minutes – February 23, 2009

Members Present:
Juliet Hyams, Greg Aldrich, Dan Anderson, Brian Bramlett, Kim Carlson, Tavo Cruz, Rachel Cody, Perry Heitman, Noel Johnson, Sharon Kelly, Stephen Metzler, Steve Pinger

Members Not Present:
Scott Seibert (excused)
Jeff Love (excused)
Bud Clark (excused)
Ron Walters (excused)

Call to Order
• at 600p by President Juliet Hyams

Call of the Roster
• as noted above
• also in attendance: Mark Sieber, NWNW; Allan Classen, NW Examiner; Michael Marino; John Bradley; Lee Stapleton; Sandra Stapleton; Frank Silva, Police Bureau; Steve Iwata, BoP&S;

Prior Board Minutes
Motion 10.02, G. Aldrich: approve January minutes with corrections as discussed, P. Heitman second;
• Motion 10.02 approved

Old Business
• Greenstreet Update;
• S. Metzler: BES, BoP&S , PDoT meeting:
• add criteria from NDP;
• approved project at NW 26th and Pettygrove;
• $30-40k from BES for demonstration project;
• stormwater infiltration facility desired;
• S. Pinger: willing developer at 16th, need to mesh respective timeframes;
• K. Carlson: NWDA will need to approach developers regarding potential demonstration funding, !% fund grant program also available through water quality program;
• Irving St. Parking Garage;
• oral arguments have not been scheduled

New Business
• Central Portland Plan discussion

President’s Report; Juliet Hyams:
• Letter to Commissioner Fritz re: Con-way Redevelopment;
Motion 10.05A, D. Anderson: approve letter (attached) incorporating comments from Transportation and Planning Committees, T. Cruz second;
• J. Hyams: wants to assess Commissioner Fritz’s position;
• S. Metzler: has been responsive to NA concerns;
• J. Bradley: Con-way process will be subsumed by Central Portland Plan and possible URD;
• N. Johnson; points in letter need to be free-standing;
• K. Carlson: reference to CPP, T.Comm. to review;
• J. Hyams: P.Comm. to review;
• S. Pinger: outline and request specific actions, use verbs;
• N. Johnson; keep genial tone;
• J. Hyams: advise us of best process;
• Motion 10.05A approved

• Election Committee
• forming committee for May elections, will report at next Board meeting

• Website
• J. Hyams: have hired independent consultant to finish revisions;
Motion 10.05B, G. Aldrich: approve $350 expenditure for website consultant, D. Anderson second;
Motion 10.05B approved;

• Retreat
• S. Kelly: retreat should build an issues-based agenda for future Board action;
• K. Carlson: establish or reconfirm values;
• N. Johnson: answers to FAQ;
• S. Pinger: first retreat discussed who we are, second should address what we do and how, identify goals and objectives

• Summer Concerts
Motion 10.05C, G. Aldrich: approve $250 expenditure for summer concert support, S. Metzler second;
Motion 10.05C approved;

• Casa Diablo
• D. Anderson: TPM violations?
• F. Silva: transferred license, agreed to security patrol;
• J. Bradley: does this use require a CUP in an IG zone?
• S. Pinger; does NWDA have jurisdiction?
• R. Rachel: what are the insurance and liability issues?
• S. Metzler: involve NINA, letter will trigger OLCC review;
• N. Johnson: cite our concern of safety;
Motion 10.05D, K. Carlson: write a letter citing our concerns regarding the operation of this business, P. Heitman second;
• Motion 10.05D approved;

Treasurer’s Report

Health and Environment Committee Report

Public Safety Committee Report

Parks and Recreation Committee Report
• Couch Park:
• T. March:
• 2003 Couch Park Master Plan is unfunded;
• schematic design is being developed for playground reconfiguration:
• increased accessibility;
• fence to separate children from off-lease dog area

Transportation Committee Report

Planning Committee Report
• MLS Task Force:
• J. Bradley:
• budget gap of ~$15m;
• net-zero parking objective;
• war memorial status;
• K. Carlson: parking issue?
• S. Kelly: what is NWDA position?
• S. Pinger: TIF funding from a what district? None exists at the site

Staff Report


• at 740p by President Juliet Hyams

Motions Summary:

MOTION 10.03 approve January minutes with corrections as discussed.

MOTION 10.05A approve letter incorporating comments from Transportation and Planning Committees(draft attached).

MOTION 10.05B approve $350 expenditure for website consultant.

MOTION 10.05C approve $250 expenditure for summer concert support.

MOTION 10.05D write a letter citing our concerns regarding the operation of Casa Diablo.

Voting Summary:

All motions were approved unanimously.

TriMet Service Reductions

Comments Off on TriMet Service Reductions

Due to the weak economy, TriMet is facing a $13.5 million budget shortfall which is forcing a 5% cut in programs and services agency-wide. After taking a number of steps to reduce costs and improve efficiency, TriMet proposed service reductions and discontinuations effective September 2009. Trimet held open houses in February and March to obtain direct feedback from customers on the proposed service cuts.

Please note: these proposed service cuts are separate from bus service changes proposed as part of the Green Line Service Plan, the details of which can be found at

Since TriMet released its draft service cut proposal in February, they have received more than 1,500 comments and suggestions from riders, community groups, students, civic leaders and TriMet operators. This feedback, along with further analysis of ridership data, nearby service, transit equity issues and school/job access, has helped us refine our proposal. Details on the revised proposal are available online at

In early April, TriMet will hold three public hearings on these proposed service cuts. Times and locations are listed below.

Monday, April 6, 2009, 4-7 p.m.
Wilson High School Cafeteria
1151 SW Vermont
Portland, OR 97219

Tuesday, April 7, 2009, 4-7 p.m.
Portland Building Auditorium, Second Floor
1120 SW 5th Ave.
Portland, OR 97204

Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 4-7 p.m.
Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office
Public Safety Training Center
12700 SE 82nd Ave.
Clackamas, OR 97015

If you cannot attend in person, you can send feedback in any of the following ways:


Comment line: 503-962-5806
Fax: 503-962-6469
Mail: TriMet-MK2, 4012 SE 17th Ave., Portland, OR 97202
TTY: 503-238-5811 (7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. weekdays)

(Please submit your comments by 5 p.m., Friday, April 10, 2009.)

Couch Park In Oregonian

Comments Off on Couch Park In Oregonian

So Couch Park was in the paper The Oregonian today (March 26; click on “read more” link below to view article). Most of the items to be removed have been removed-in my opinion from what was presented at the public meeting. So if you walk by the park what you see is basically what is being salvaged and brought up to code. (The yellow slide is still there is being replaced one for one.)

I was at a meeting (not a NWDA meeting) last night that focused on free summer concerts in our neighborhood parks. Washington Park free concerts are not funded this year. Which means that the concerts in our community parks might be the main free music event this year on the west side. The concerts volunteers at Couch and Wallace are actively seeking out individual tax deductible donations to maintain the six concerts 4 @ Wallace and 2 @ Couch Park-donations are down this year. In other words money is very tight this year please help out. They even just need helping hands during the concerts.

Contact: Judith Yeckel Summer Concerts Production Mgr. at Portland Parks & Rec.

* Tanya (NWDA Parks Chair) *
Read more

Transportation Meeting – Wed. April 1, 6:00 pm

Comments Off on Transportation Meeting – Wed. April 1, 6:00 pm

April Transportation Committee meeting
Wed. April 1, 2009
NW Library


6:00-6:05 Introductions

6:05-6:30 Welcome Brian Sheehan, West Portland Planner, PBPS to bring us up-to-date on the transportation impacts of proposed development on Vaughn St., including data from the Metro tranportation study. This issue, known as “the Remand”, surfaces at least annually. Interest in this issue is high due to anticipated development in the North Pearl, Con-way and along a proposed streetcar alignment that may someday reach Montgomery Park.

6:30-6:55 Welcome Ross Swanson and Bill Hoffman, PBOT, and Young Park, TriMet, to bring us up-to-date information related to West Burnside improvements that will enhance pedestrian safety, tame traffic and facilitate transit connections. In particular, we’ll hear about and provide feedback on a planned pedestrian island on the south side of Burnside at Morrison and NW 20th Place. Installation of this island is anticipated for this May 2009.

6:55-7:00 Closing

7:00 Adjourn

Couch Park Play Area To Close For Maintenance

Comments Off on Couch Park Play Area To Close For Maintenance

Beginning Monday, March 23, Portland Parks & Recreation will temporarily close the play area at Couch Park in order to make several improvements, including the installation of a fence around the play area, as well as several safety and ADA accessibility changes. “We’re very excited to be making these enhancements to the play area,” said Terri Davis, the West Service Zone Manager for Portland Parks & Recreation. “These changes will make the play area safer, more accessible, and fulfill a promise made to the community to provide a fence surrounding the play area.”

The closure of the play area is scheduled to last three weeks, during which time the fence will be installed and some existing features will be removed. Later this spring, when several new play features arrive, a second closure will be necessary to install them. Public notice will be provided before that closure.

These improvements are made possible by a grant from the Opus Foundation, in partnership with the Portland Parks Foundation, as well as funding provided through the 2002 Parks Levy.

For more information, contact Bryan Aptekar, PP&R West Service Zone Coordinator, at 503.823.6973 or visit

Planning Minutes – 3/19/09

Comments Off on Planning Minutes – 3/19/09

NWDA Planning Cte 03 19 2009

John Bradley, Stephen Metzler, Don Genasci, Roger Vrilakas, Noel Johnson, Kevin Kenaga, Ron Walters, Larry Westerman, Steve Pinger

Bradley—URA likely because of funding for MLS stadium improvements on PGE Park.
We need to look at whether we want some URA funds to go to our area, Conway development, and what for.

Pinger—Who says ‘yes’ we’re forming a URA in this area. I’ve been chasing this question for while. Nod of approval from affected property owners and residents? This was all underground for a long time and now it’s out as if money’s being withdrawn for it.

Metzler—what happens to soccer if no URA?

Bradley—there was money for Goose Hollow area, MLS task force signed off on this, even though some who understood URA’s better had concerns (Bradley, Jerry Powell, PDC folks.)
Last vote at Council predicated that URA should not be formed until a process. Ted Wheeler told city council that the county is tired of city taking money from the county without a process. I believe there will be one large URA with a lot of people involved.

Pinger—there was a very specific process to get the Pearl District NA involved in the formation of the River District, doesn’t see that here.

Stapleton, Pinger—we’ve gotten away from URA’s as tools for blighted areas.

Bradley—my take is this is the last one like this, half a dozen bills at the legislature to change how this is used. I think this will take a long time but will be formed. Goose Hollow has no main street, will claim to be blighted.

Johnson—it’s right to be concerned about how & if a URA is formed, but we need to be out front about what we want for our share if it happens.

Bradley—questions batted around like ‘why would you not want the disadvantaged in our area to have nice schools’ etc.

Genasci—we won’t get a very big chunk of this: will it be a big pool, or assigned?

Pinger—in the old days, there was a plan.

Bradley—Merrit Paulson, new PGE Park owner, in favor of URA in GH area.

Sieber—can contact PDC rep who goes to OTCT. Bradley—do so.

Westerman—there’s a limit on bonding and pot that can then be drawn on?

Pinger—yes, but river district has had bonding increased 4-fold.

Bradley—this URA was estimated at half a billion for bonding.

Pinger—estimate in some others was too high, they weren’t performing.

Johnson—looking at the map, the most valuable chunk of property in the county and it would out of the county’s ability to collect the revenue.

Bradley—which is why Wheeler & Leonard went at it.

Pinger—it’s true, the county is being bought up by the city, as it were.

Johnson—we can position ourselves for some amenities, for example a park was mentioned in the letter, mixed income housing. What goals do we have? How to use this money?

Bradley—a chunk of money could be used for Vaughn—I-405 intersection.

Genasci—also a new intersection of 21st at 405 (which was to have been constructed originally) could be on the table.

Bradley—what is our highest priority?

I-405 intersection, green streets, park/square (what’s it look like? 200X460 2 acre minimum, size of Couch park. Metzler—may need to be bigger to meet the population needs. 7 acres plus as a rough estimate.) Community Center.

Walters—sounds like the conversation we were having at Conway, also need to take into account what the city, county might want. 6:1 brings in more funding.

Pinger—if it’s a foregone conclusion that we’ll have this, the what do we want question: the only way this makes any sense is if this is a blighted area. The only area that passes this for me is adjacent to I-405 and the I-405 ramps. Degrade the livability of the neighborhood in a serious way.

Stapleton—commercial businesses have been priced out of the neighborhood.

Pinger—some groups affected by the I-405 ramps as well, that’s the elephant; then there’s the mongoose.

For example, Goose Hollow, one of three things they’re after is capping freeway discussion. The conversation about what that freeway hath wrought in the central area is important.

Stapleton—should take into account entrances & exits of the neighborhood at I-405.

Pinger—I’m not an advocate for improving the efficiency of I-405, but mitigating the design impacts. We’ve testified here and in N. Pearl plan that focussing height adjacent to ramps.

Genasci—more radical approach is to take away spur ramp on Vaughn, bring it down to Front.

Pinger—remember where this neighborhood started, opposing the original plan for the ramp.

Bradley—It’s very hard to find out what people want and how much it will cost. Portland State, for example.

Vrilakas—is it realistic to cap I-405?

Bradley—Goose wants better connectivity to downtown (small=widening, larger=cap or foot bridge) and for 18th to function as a Main Street.

Pinger—they want significant capping, center at 18th & Jefferson, figure out what Lincoln HS will be doing.

Bradley—baseball park will be completely remodeled. Providence would like a small sports medicine center in that area, pick up the sports team and the folks from the MAC.

Genasci—talking about blighted areas, the end of 21st where there are tilt-up buildings, up to Conway. Could improve it as a better shopping street.

Johnson—so a short, succinct, concrete list would be helpful. The Fields Park might give some good estimates for cost & size.

Walters—the streetcar has been a major topic of conversation, since it will be on the table we should have an opinion about it.

Genasci—Conway’s talking about the streetcar happening says it will at 6:1 but not at 3:1; using a different funding stream (URA) could disconnect the FAR from the streetcar.

Walters—park is easily on the list, supported by the neighborhood. But what’s the process for the streetcar. If you do this quickly, you may have more influence over what occurs there.
You could have a short white paper, without detail, with sensible recommendations.

Metzler—goes back to the NW Plan.

Sieber—one of the advantages of using the plan is that it can move the conversation away from ‘let’s get some free money’ to ‘here’s what works and how do we pay for it?’

Genasci—we can use the plan as the core of the white paper, get people to read it.

Stapleton—park should include housing relationship.

Pinger—yes, the plan does have significant housing references. Changes the discussion about how to fund, what is public benefit.

Bradley—density isn’t a public benefit, per se.

Vrilakas—Conway has used notion that 6:1 is needed to fund amenities, but with this funding we could get those at 3:1. Makes their claim less true.

Walters—if you build it up there are more dollars to be had: who gets them? If all to us, we’d like it, if all to Conway, we feel differently. Conway argues bigger is better, we don’t necessarily agree.

Genasci—it’s a little complicated (but not that complicated) because you also need to pay attention configuration.

Pinger—do you agree that the plan is our strongest position from which to approach this list of URA preferences?


Pinger—I’m not aware of URA funds going to highway ramps.

Bradley—let’s leave this as currently unknown.

Metzler—The key question—is it Conway vs. Stadium for money?

Bradley—it’s everyone, also Lincoln wants a higher, modern campus. KGW site is also marked for redevelopment.

Pinger—does finger go up to MLC? Parking garage site?

Bradley—Goose Hollow does want some structured parking in there area: Stadium, Lincoln, MAC want it.

URA money can’t pay for schools, but could be used to acquire land or for predevelopment costs.

Johnson—as we think what are priorities, we might find more success with a park, because Conway wants that. If we pick things big groups don’t want, will be harder.

Pinger—there are also community and institutional interests.

Genasci—volunteers taking apart the plan, pulling out the basic ideas for this.

Bradley—Don’s class has been doing some nice drawings on Conway area, 3:1 etc. We can scale those down, bring forward as something to counter 6:1 development. Digital format.

Genasci—won’t be next week, it’s Spring break. In three weeks would be appropriate—April 9th.

Bradley—also a battle whether we want a streetcar motoring down 18th.

Pinger, Metzler—the Streetcar advisory committee and technical committee are working to come up with final positioning recommendations. All of the routes were from Burnside to Montgomery Park, assuming streetcar on Burnside as a given.

Genasci, Pinger—streetcar alignment as addendum to district plan white paper?

Pinger—main streets are emphasis for streetcar routes.

Bradley—then spur makes sense.

Genasci, Pinger, Walters, Metzler will work on this in two weeks (several are out of town next week.)

Work Plan Comments?

Comments Off on Work Plan Comments?

We welcome your comments about the Planning Committee work plan.

New NWDA Website

We’re pleased to introduce the new website for the NWDA. We invite residents, business owners, employees, and visitors to participate on the website by sharing your comments on any or all of the many topics now appearing on the website. We look forward to your input and participation in the neighborhood. Please sign up for our newsletter to keep up-to-date on neighborhood events and activities.

Comments Off on


Liquor License Renewals – South of Burnside Street

Comments Off on Liquor License Renewals – South of Burnside Street

All liquor licenses located South of Burnside within the Portland City limits will expire on July 1st, 2009. There are approximately 2400 liquor licenses in the City of Portland, approximately half of which are coming up for renewal. As a part of the renewal process, the City of Portland reviews current licensees in order to make a recommendation to the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC). The role of neighbors, Neighborhood Associations and Business Associations is a key component to this licensing process.

The annual renewal provides an opportunity for neighborhoods and community members to identify problem locations before the City makes its recommendation to the OLCC. All interested parties are encouraged to provide information regarding liquor establishments with ongoing concerns as soon as possible. Concerned neighbors and community organizations wishing to oppose a license renewal for a particular premise South of Burnside must advise the Office of Neighborhood Involvement by May 11th, 2009.

If there are concerns regarding a liquor location but neighbors do not wish to formally oppose the outlet’s renewal, now is an excellent time to bring these issues to the City’s attention so that we can work with the licensees to resolve specific problems informally.

Please direct your comments to Theresa Marchetti, Liquor Licensing Specialist at the Office of Neighborhood Involvement, 1221 SW 4th Ave Suite 110, Portland Or, 97062 or 503-823-3092 or

Next Page »