UPDATE: Hayden Island Development Moratorium Approved
OUTSIDE EXPERTS:
HAYDEN ISLAND FREEWAY RATED "F" In response, Adams proposes development moratorium that allows "everyday business improvements" on Hayden Island but delays congestion-causing development until new Columbia River bridge and neighborhood plans are in place "F" is the grade outside experts has given I-5 freeway in the vicinity of Hayden Island during morning and afternoon peak commuter hours, "...at capacity conditions for at least seven hours each day," states an August 25, 2006 report prepared by David Evans and Associates for the City of Portland. In addition to looking at the freeway capacity of I-5 in the Hayden Island area, David Evans and Associates also studied the safety of the area's intersections and ramps, including their crash history. Based upon their analyses, David Evans and Associates determined:
In a summary of their findings, David Evans and Associates concluded, "Assuming no significant changes to the existing highway infrastructure, a substantial increase in traffic demand to or from Hayden Island during weekday and weekend peak periods, including midday periods, would exacerbate existing capacity and safety conditions." "This analysis of the transportation system serving the island reveals what many Hayden Island residents and area businesses already know," said Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams. "Hayden Island does not have the transportation capacity to absorb significant new development." Adams' proposed moratorium has exemptions to allow for the following:
"For example, if another grocery store moved into the former Zupan's location and did not expand the current facility but improved the inside of the building, they would be allowed to complete this project," said Adams. Portland City Council will consider enacting a temporary moratorium on Hayden Island on October 4, 2006 at 6 p.m. at City Hall. The temporary delay in development would affect projects within General Commercial (CG) and General Industrial (IG2) zones which add significant vehicle trips to the transportation system. The ordinance filed today also included the follow analysis:
If this ordinance is passed by City Council, the temporary moratorium would initially be enacted for six months. State law allows a moratorium to be reenacted for up to an additional eighteen months. UPDATE: The Columbia River Crossing (CRC) Taskforce is a 39-member Task Force comprised of leaders from a broad cross section of the Washington and Oregon communities interested in the project, including public agencies, businesses, civic organizations, neighborhoods, and freight, commuter and environmental groups. This Task Force provides recommendations regarding the Columbia River Crossing Project. This afternoon, the Taskforce approved, without opposition, a resolution to support a moratoriam on Hayden Island. The CRC Taskforce is: Hal Dengerink, Chancellor, Washington State University, Vancouver (Abstained) Dave Frei, Arnada Neighborhood Association, Southwest Washington
Posted Wed, 10/04/2006 - 6:36pm.
[[ Categories: Jobs & Economy | News | North Portland | Office of Transportation | Public Safety | Transportation ]]
Numara taşınabilirliği,Submitted by Numara taşınabilirliği on Mon, 09/29/2008 - 1:27am.
Numara taşınabilirliği, cep telefonu kullanıcılarının mevcut numaralarını aynen koruyarak hizmet aldıkları operatörü özgürce değiştirebilmeleridir. Bu şekilde kullanıcılar operatörünü değiştirdiklerinde kullandıkları numara 11 hane olarak bütünüyle aynı kalacağından, o döneme kadar kendilerine mevcut numaralarından ulaşmış olan kişiler aynı şekilde ulaşmaya devam edebileceklerdir.Numara taşıma Böylece kullanıcılar operatörlerini değiştirdiklerinde kendilerine ulaşmalarını istedikleri kişilere yeni bir numaralarını bildirmek durumunda kalmayacaklardır. » reply
Stop The MadnessSubmitted by Fred Jidler on Mon, 09/25/2006 - 7:49pm.
Hayden Island is a congested swamp. » reply
SoWa ParallelsSubmitted by Steve on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 4:59am.
Since you are pushing for a development moratorium on Hayden Island, are you going to be consistent and apply the same logic to SoWa which has the same congestion issues, if not worse? Or maybe you can explain the difference (don't tell me the Tram saves it.) » reply
SoWaSubmitted by Ed Garren on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 6:40am.
Sam is the commissioner for Portland, he has no jurisdiction, authority or control over anything in another state. He can suggest, ask, encourage. But that's about it. Well, I guess he could muster an army and invade SoWa (under false pretense) but that's about it, and the occupation would be costly. » reply
As to Wal Mart's offenses,Submitted by jim karlock on Sat, 10/07/2006 - 9:55am.
As to Wal Mart's offenses, see: http://www.taxpayersleague.org/NewIssues/Wal-mart/Wal-Mart.htm thanks » reply
Moe Wal-MartSubmitted by jim karlock on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 10:02pm.
Tonight on 'Nightline' Oct. 16, 2006 -- HEALTH CLINIC OF THE FUTURE Wal-Mart -- the nation's largest grocery store -- has a new service to offer, and if it catches on, it could create a revolution, not in food sales but in health care. Walk-in medical clinics are opening in Wal-Mart and other stores across the country, and people in a rush who need some attention can walk in and get a diagnosis and their shopping done in the same building. And just like most of what Wal-Mart offers, it's cheap. Even the uninsured may be looking at something they can use. "Nightline's" anchor went to Wal-Mart's main store in Fayetteville, Ark., to see how it works. So, is this the answer to America's health care problems? » reply
Gutsy and goodSubmitted by Odell on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 7:56am.
With your background I voted for hoping that you would stand up for Portland's working folks. You are. Thank you and keep up the good work. » reply
moratorium exemptionsSubmitted by Gregg Hilman on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 8:00am.
I get it now, gridlock on Jantzen beach will jam freight for the whole region. I wish this had been done before they took down the first half of the mall. I am not sure what you will be able to get done in only 6 months but anything is better than what these numbers show will happen. » reply
I own a store in the little shopping centerSubmitted by Jean on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 8:03am.
I own a store in the little shopping center to the north of the mall. Will I be able to go ahead with my remodel project I have planned for next month? » reply
If you already have permits,Submitted by Jesse Beason on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 8:07am.
If you already have permits, definitely. And if you don't yet, it's still likely you won't be affected by the delay. If you email me at jbeason@ci.portland.or.us or call at 503-823-4128, I'm happy to talk about it further. » reply
Questions need to be AnsweredSubmitted by Terry Parker on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 10:04am.
“Since vehicular access is provided to Hayden Island via one interchange with I-5 and no other access roadways exist, I-5's existing capacity constraint significantly limits access to Hayden Island.“ This yet again exemplifies the immediate need for a local motor vehicle connector bridge to the mainland. As I have previously suggested, the possibility exists of using the old Sauvie Island Bridge main span with new approaches to connect Hayden Island across the slough. Why has such an option not been investigated? “I-5 in the vicinity of Hayden Island operates at level-of-service (LOS) "F" for three hours or more during both the AM and PM peak periods, which is inconsistent with policies from the City of Portland's Transportation System Plan and Metro's Regional Transportation Plan. These plans consider allowance of LOS F conditions for only one hour during each of the AM and PM peak periods.” Why is there a plan in place that considers any allowance of LOS F.? This is planning infrastructure that is obsolete before construction is even started. “Vehicular queues can extend beyond the available storage capacities at five other key at-grade intersections on Hayden Island. “ This same scenario also takes place at other Portland area metered freeway on ramps too. Should also they be fixed? From Steve “Since you are pushing for a development moratorium on Hayden Island, are you going to be consistent and apply the same logic to SoWa which has the same congestion issues, if not worse? I too would like to see this question answered with a response. » reply
Facts speak for themselvesSubmitted by Larry in Vancouver on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 10:16am.
As a daily commuter from Van. WA, I appreciate Sam's regional leadership on transporation issues -- he is from Portland but I feel like he also looks out for me in SW Wasington. Gridlock on the freeway at Hayden Island would cost all of us business owners millions. » reply
Hayden IslandSubmitted by Jon on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 12:13pm.
Sam, Please just admit you are doing this only to stop Wal-Mart !!!! If Starbucks or any other company you like wanted to put in a major outlet on Hayden Island you would be cheering and rejoiceing your accomplishment of adding a new business to Portland. You have one adjenda for Portland. That is STOP WAL-MART AT ALL COSTS NO MATTER WHO IT HURTS. Well all you are doing is hurting Portland !!!!! Why don't you look at what really needs to be done, ADD CAPACITY TO OUR ROADWAYS !!! You have done nothing as transportation commisioner for Portland. YOUR JOB IS NOT TO STOP WAL-MART IN OREGON !!! Now quit being business unfriendly and do your job as commisioner and help create a business friendly atmosphere in Portland and most of all Oregon. You should be thankful that a company such as Wal-Mart wants to locate in Portland. Just think, if these wal-Marts come, don't you think they may want to build a distribution center in our region????? Oh, I forgot, you want congestion so that their trucks would cause you to many head aches. Oh by the way, can you build me a tram so I can get from my house to my work???? » reply
Hayden IslandSubmitted by Becky on Sat, 09/30/2006 - 7:41am.
Jon: » reply
Becky, I am a resident nearSubmitted by Jon on Mon, 10/02/2006 - 3:58pm.
Becky, I am a resident near Hayden Island and I work downtown. So don't tell me I don't know what the freeway is like !!!!! I do my shopping on Hayden Island since that is the closest area to me and honestly, I like Jantzen Beach area. Development on Hayden Island isn't the issue !!!!!! The issue is people like Sam Adams dislikes new business so he and the Potter & Kulingowski likes to make it so hard for the working folks with their business unfreindly antics !!! Sam wants us all to ride bikes. Sorry, this is not an option for 99% of the people and you Yuppie granola types on Hayden Island. Tell me, why Sam and Potter aren't for increasing capacity on I-5??? They like the congestion and don't say that they don't. It's has come out of Sam's mouth that the only way to releive congestion is to make people ride their bikes to work !!!! I am telling Sam to be resnable. With people like Sam and Potter running this city, we might as well turn out the lights. This is why Portland, and Oregon for that matter, is a dieing city and state. » reply
SoWaSubmitted by ValkRaider on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 12:23pm.
South Waterfront(SoWa) for those who do not know what it is, and since previous commentors have left it out, is the area being developed at the west end of the Ross Island bridge, south of the bridge along the Willamette shore, the base of the new OHSU tram. I am not an expert or an official or anything along those lines, I am just a resident of Brooklyn who passes through the SoWa area regularly - but I can see several differences between SoWa and Hayden Island. SoWa for one, is not an island. Hayden Island has only one way to get on or off the island without a boat - and that is I5. No surface streets even, only an interstate - with the regions worst congestion. SoWa is also along I5, but in an area that has a lower congestion rate (currently). SoWa has pedestrian and bicycle access via riverfront parks. SoWa has several access points via surface street, and is also served by Oregon hwy 43 (Macadam). SoWa has the streetcar and the Tram for ingress and egress as well. While I agree - as I have to move through the area daily - that SoWa is poised to become a nightmare for traffic, I don't see how it can be compared to Hayden Island when considering a moratorium on development. Worst case scenerio a person can easily walk out of SoWa - but it is not such with Hayden Island. These comments seem to be ill suited and misplaced attacks on Sam Adams and the SoWa developments - using the Hayden Island issue as a venue. SoWa might be flawed, but it is a discussion for elsewhere - please remember that city council has LOTS of problems they have to deal with. Just based on my quick read, I think a ban on development on Hayden Island is prudent until we have better access to the site. I think we need a surface street connector from the island to the Oregon mainland, and that we need to extend light rail from the Expo Center to Jantzen Beach. Hayden Island has wonderful potential, in my opinion, for tourism. Imagine something like a Six-Flags on the western half of the Island. Or a sports venue or stadium... Or some great resorts on the water, or anything like that... It is a prime spot to bring Portland into the big leagues. But Absolutely not until we have better transportation there. The Columbia River Crossing project needs to be done, and a couple smaller projects as well. Like a small bridge connecting the East end of the island to the mainland, just a two lane small bridge with bike paths and sidewalks - to allow locals to get on and off the island without using I5. The improved corssings with the Columbia Crossing project including all modes of transit. Improved railroad bridges that maybe include pedestrian or bicycle access. To really use Hayden Island it needs at least three connections to the Just my opinion of course... » reply
Sam, maybe we should fastSubmitted by Lenny Anderson on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 2:00pm.
Sam, » reply
"...at capacity conditionsSubmitted by Isaac on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 4:31pm.
"...at capacity conditions for at least seven hours each day," states an August 25, 2006 report prepared by David Evans and Associates for the City of Portland." This means that the freeway is operating under capacity for 17 hours per day. How's that for efficiency? Why is there a plan in place that considers any allowance of LOS F? LOS F is a designation by traffic engineers whose only agenda is to make cars move very fast. It's like when you take you take your car in to get new tires and they tell you that you need new breaks too, but you know that they're doing fine. » reply
I still don't see the diffSubmitted by Steve on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 7:58pm.
I still don't see the diff between how we treat SoWa vs. Hayden Island. I am going to leave out bike/walking since I think the reason Mr Adams decided to shut down development wasn't because of bike/ped jams. SoWa is an island, metaphorically. You have one access road (unless you count a small street to downtown) by car, SW Macadam. CoP decided to allow one 15-story office building plus 3 similar towers of condos to be developed before they had any idea on how to pay for transport (unless you count the money sunk into the tram) access by car. Unfortunately, this is what passes for financial planning - start developing before you have a clue on how to pay for it a la Mayor Katz. I would wager those four bldgs at 800AM and 500PM will pour more traffic onto SW Macadam at one time than any WalMart. The nicety is that it flows right into one freeway (I-5) or downtown/RossIsland, both of which have half-mile backups now in the middle of the day before anyone occupies SoWa. I really don't expect this to be fixed anytime soon since almost all transprotation money is spent on light rail projects. » reply
1) Do other areas aroundSubmitted by john on Tue, 09/26/2006 - 9:54pm.
2) This is not about working folks. This is about rich folks who want quiet waterfront property without traffic. » reply
I'd saySubmitted by Jesse Beason on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 2:20pm.
1) Hayden Island is the only developed island in the City. It is the only place with only one failing access point. To get to the airport, I have numerous routes--freeway and local streets. To get to Bevaerton, I have numerous routes--freeway and local streets. 2) Hayden Island has more affordable housing units in trailer parks than market-rate homes. And I'd say you can't get much louder than a highway that's not going anywhere, and a race track right cross the inlet. » reply
"Hayden Island has moreSubmitted by Steve on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 5:36pm.
"Hayden Island has more affordable housing units in trailer parks than market-rate homes." I'd look at all the condos you approved prior to the moratorium, they are expensive. I think this is what he was referring to. Those type of people don't like the type of people who frequent WalMart. » reply
I-5 at SoWa is quicklySubmitted by Steve Schopp on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 7:20am.
I-5 at SoWa is quickly becoming as bad as I-5 at Hayden Island. It appears to be planned that way. The 205 crossing is also rated F at peak hours and the city has OK'd two big box stores, Ikea and Costco Home, at Cascade Station. This undoubtedly will accelerate that crossing So while Sam is claiming it is concern for traffic congestion which has him stopping Walmart, his PDOT department, along ODOT and Metro, is refusing to accept that their ped/bike/rail alternatives are not viable alternatives at all. Yet Commissioner Sam is committed to the agenda of getting more light rail and congestion be damned. After Sam finishes obstructing or delaying Walmart and helps get light rail to Vancouver, traffic congestion will be far worse and he'll be busy claiming light rail on Barbur will help the choke point he helped create at SoWa. » reply
this guy hates everything portland doesSubmitted by Polly on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 10:15pm.
this guy hates EVERYTHING portland does. here we has a portland leader standing up to keep the FREEWAYS moving. an effort that is supported by most all the transportation leaders in the region and all he can do is criticize... » reply
I worked as a consultant on the IKEA project...Submitted by Kyle Wender on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 10:18pm.
...and I have seen that the traffic impact study of the IKEA store, the surrounding streets and roads will be able to handle the IKEA traffic and much more... » reply
How do we get the wholeSubmitted by jim karlock on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 9:31pm.
How do we get the whole David Evans and Associates report/study. Someone said it was on this blog, but I don't see it. Thanks » reply
inspiredSubmitted by Hank Berger on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 10:08pm.
Sam, I am grateful for your inspired but fact-based approach to doing your job. Previous portland transportation commissioners just put their hand out asking for more money. You show that you are willing to fight and be creative to keep the traffic moving regardless of whether or not you have the money to fix all the problems. Keep at it! Hank B » reply
YEA!Submitted by Carol in Vancouver on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 10:12pm.
thanks to Mayor Royce Pollard for standing with Sam on this issue! this is the best pdx and vancouver cooperation I have evr seen in the 17 years I have lived here in Washington. » reply
Pollard just wants to forceSubmitted by jim karlock on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 8:42am.
Pollard just wants to force people to stay in Vancouver so they can pay sales tax for him to spend on his little Pearl distict. » reply
North Macadam is an Island w/ F level of ServiceSubmitted by Jerry on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 11:25pm.
Valkraider and others: There has been several postings in the past months by Commissioner Adams and staff- Roland. One particular post, "Time-Out for Large Scale Development on Hayden Island" found at the bottom of this post that has two of my posts titled "Hayden Island Compared to North Macadam and "North Macadam=Hayden Island=Island". Each post gives information that demonstrates how NM is very similar to Hayden Island. And there is a call for a NM Moratorium like Hayden Island. There have been several requests of Sam and Roland to address this similarity. If "F" level of service is the formula to request a moratorium for Hayden Island, it surely applies to NM. Macadam Ave has "F" level of service at SW Bancroft, SW Taylors Ferry Rd., several blocks leading up to Sellwood Bridge, and SW Nebraska to SW Taylors Ferry Rd. And now with the total failure of the new two lane off-ramp going north off I-5 onto Macadam right at the NM District, there is massive backup from SW Bancroft going north to SW Lowell for over 15 blocks. As Commissioner Adams points out in his recent posting here, there are no funds for the minimum $170MILLION traffic projects to help relieve this "F" level of service identified in the NM URA Plan. I feel that other bloggers requests for how NM is different than Hayden Island, and the NM moratorium is valid. » reply
To all the haters:Submitted by Mr Nice on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 7:43am.
Do you folks understand how traffic impact studies are done? How computerized travel demand models are built and executed? The vast difference in the total number of trips that are generated by land uses as disparate as high density residential dwellings vs. big box retailers that include supermarkets? The impact of the "mode-choice" splits in the determination of additional auto trips, and their impact on existing conditions? From your postings, it doesn't sound like it. I would read up a lot on the subject - I think it would enlighten you some. In fact, while you're at it, spend some time learning how Portland transportation funding works. Lastly, try and truly understand what it means to plan for a city 30 years from now, and how much time and effort the folks that are working their a$$ off to create a viable city spend working for the never-satisfied people like yourselves. » reply
"""Do you folks understandSubmitted by Steve Schopp on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 7:24pm.
"""Do you folks understand how traffic impact studies are done?""" Did you copy that Mr. Nice. There is no fine about Ikea/Costco and the 205 crossing, it's already an F in peak hours. Do you understand what's going on here? it ain't traffic planning » reply
Actually, no.Submitted by Actually, no. on Sun, 10/01/2006 - 3:04am.
Most major developments that have the potential to impact traffic have to supply the city with a traffic study to even get their permits to move forward. And IKEA is no exception. They did a traffic study and that area can handle the increased traffic. Ikea doesn't create as much traffic as big box stores, either. (Fewer people go there and they stay for a longer time.) And if i recall correctly, there are a host of traffic improvements going in down in SoWa. I doubt that they were chosen blindly - there was almost certainly traffic analysis and study done for this. Traffic in SoWa will be like traffic downtown - congested, but not standstill gridlock like on I-5. » reply
Mr Nice Do you folksSubmitted by jim karlock on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 8:35am.
Mr Nice Do you folks understand how traffic impact studies are done? ... The impact of the "mode-choice" splits in the determination of additional auto trips, and their impact on existing conditions? Mr Nice Lastly, try and truly understand what it means to plan for a city 30 years from now, and how much time and effort the folks that are working their a$$ off to create a viable city Planners need to abandon their dogma and start planning for the way people want to live, not the way planners think they should live. Thanks » reply
LivabilitySubmitted by Valkraider on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 12:42pm.
What defines livability? Portland, BECAUSE of it's high density approach, is much more livable than many other cities it's size. We cannot continue to expand cities at the rate we have the previous 50 years. We are running out of land. Remember, food has to grow somewhere. And the more farms in fertile areas (like the Tualatin Valley) that we displace with shopping malls and WAL-MART and car-focused development - the more farms have to relocate to LESS fertile areas which require more fertilizer and water to grow the same food. So we build areas that require more cars, and move farms to areas that require more fertilizer (which is petroleum based by the way) and water. That is not a long term sustainable approach. We already see the effects of it since we moved many of the farms in the midwest into the valleys of California. Now they consume water from all of the surrounding states - water that was NOT being consumed when the farms were located in the wetter more fertile midwest. Once we pave over a farm - it doesn't come back. Density is the only alternative. The car will not be a viable means of transport 100 years from now. It is already seeing problems. We need a better mix of options. Density, public transport, and reduced need for single vehicle trips is all that is left after the car becomes economically not viable. Density is only a four letter word to Americans. Every other place in the world density is common. Vancouver. London. Sao Paolo. Kuala Lumpur. India. China. Germany. UK. Russia. Brazil. Everywhere but the USA. The USA where for some reason we need 4000 square foot houses for families of 4, and yards the size of a city park for kids who sit inside and surf the net or play PS2. I live in s small urban house with my family. My entire property is smaller than most suburban front yards. My family shares one vehicle and we utilize transit. My kids are just as heathly as any. In fact - we would prefer a Condo - no yard to maintain at all, and lots more stuff to do nearby... Why do we need 200,000 square foot stores with 2000 parking spaces. Parking spaces that go UNUSED for 2/3 of the day, just sitting there causing runoff and soaking up sun and generally wasted. Why not have the parking lot under the building? Why does the building need to be only one story? Why not have offices or condos above the store? Why waste the space? Wouldn't it be nicer if the big block store had the parking underneath, the store on the first floor, and some offices and condos on maybe three or four floors above it - and then the 5 acre parking lot could be a park or greenspace or something else, maybe saving one or two farms? And the people who live and work in the buildings could shop at the stores - without even getting in a car? What a concept... » reply
Valkraider: Portland,Submitted by jim karlock on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 12:26am.
Valkraider: Portland, BECAUSE of it's high density approach, is much more livable than many other cities it's size. Valkraider: We cannot continue to expand cities at the rate we have the previous 50 years. We are running out of land. Valkraider: Remember, food has to grow somewhere. Valkraider: the more farms have to relocate to LESS fertile areas which require more fertilizer and water to grow the same food. Valkraider: The car will not be a viable means of transport 100 years from now. Valkraider: after the car becomes economically not viable. Valkraider: Every other place in the world density is common. Vancouver. London. Sao Paolo. Kuala Lumpur. India. China. Germany. UK. Russia. Brazil. Everywhere but the USA. Valkraider: I live in s small urban house with my family. My entire property is smaller than most suburban front yards. Valkraider: Why not have the parking lot under the building?.....Wouldn't it be nicer if the big block store had the parking underneath, Thanks » reply
...the world’s populationSubmitted by Clay Fouts on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 8:06am.
...the world’s population is about to start shrinking. This is by far the wackiest assertion you've made, and that's really saying something. » reply
B>Clay Fouts ...theSubmitted by jim karlock on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 10:37am.
<>B>Clay Fouts ...the world’s population is about to start shrinking. This is by far the wackiest assertion you've made, and that's really saying something. Already each new UN population estimate puts the earth’s peak in population closer in and at a lower number of people. Thanks » reply
oops. Left out the end ofSubmitted by jim karlock on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 10:38am.
oops. Left out the end of bold » reply
count vs. rateSubmitted by Clay Fouts on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 11:32am.
The term "shrinking" applies to quantity but you're using it in reference to a rate. According to the UN, while the world as a whole and most of its constiuent regions will begin to slow their growth rate sometime in the next 25 years or so, the total population continues to increase well into the 50-year projections. Europe is the one regional exception projected to have a negative growth rate and consequently shrinking sum population. While some of that slow-down does and will continue to come from well-to-do people making the conscious decision to reproduce in a limited fashion, most of it will more likely result from the classic population controls: the inability to reproduce successfully while living with Malthusian squalor, disease, starvation, and warfare. » reply
Japan has a negative rate ofSubmitted by Bruce on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 4:26pm.
Japan has a negative rate of population growth, and it is the stated public policy objective of the PRC (google "one child policy"). Maybe they ought to change their name to the DPRC, the "Declining Population Republic of China." And we thought the social engineering in Portland was getting bad. » reply
"Density is the onlySubmitted by Steve on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 7:26pm.
"Density is the only alternative." I have to disagree. If you look at what is happening to most inner sities, they are shrinking. Growth in suburbs is more than compensating for requiring everyone to go downtown. Example, I have friends who line in Pleasanton and Walnut Creek, they can live, work, shop, etc. within in a few miles of their home (and not SF), saving a lot of energy/time. In Portland, the hottest office space is along Kruse Way and retail space is Bridgeport. Meanwhile, CoP keeps throwing money at downtown when the biggest employers downtown are government (CoP, Oregon, Mult County.) In addition, downtown retail languishes (M&F shrinks and Pioneer Place has lots of empty stores.) We have enough food (I haven't seen a famine here and obesity is a major issue) and I believe Midwest farmers are draining the major aquifer at a pretty fast rate. Cali is a more efficient place to grow produce. A lot of people want a yard for their kids and good roads/schools something dense areas cannot supply. Density is merely a mantra which requires ture believers and not the only solution. » reply
Density is an OPTION, not a MANDATESubmitted by Mike on Wed, 10/25/2006 - 4:03pm.
Good for you that you love condo life. Some people don't. Some people want a 4000 square foot house so they can house all their toys. If they want to pay for it and it isn't in your neighborhood (and I've yet to see a McMansion in the Pearl), then what do you care? Ditto with your dedication to use only one car. That is awesome and I commend your family. I am glad that you can utilize a streetcar or a MAX train. My family needs two cars because it is convenient and, what the heck, this is America and we can afford it. The vast majority of Portland's population is the same. The problem is that greenies' insistence on using limited transportation funds for a rail line generates a benefit for very few. Isn't part of that tax meant to be used for my benefit too? » reply
Mike: Density is an OPTION,Submitted by jim karlock on Wed, 10/25/2006 - 4:42pm.
Mike: Density is an OPTION, not a MANDATE http://www.StopMetro.com Metro recommends a 23% increase in density in your neighborhood How many people want to take away Metro’s power to mandate increased density? Thanks » reply
Transit Benefits Everyone, Whether or Not You Use It.Submitted by Roland_Chlapowski on Thu, 10/26/2006 - 2:15pm.
If everyone who currently bikes or takes transit started driving everywhere, your family's two cars would be stuck in a heck of a lot more traffic. The simple truth is that whether or not you use transit personally, you benefit from public investments into it. Texas A&M's 2005 Texas Transportation Institute Urban Mobility Report found: "Public Transportation Service Regular route public transportation service on buses and trains provides a significant amount of peak period travel in the most congested corridors and urban areas in the U.S. If publictransportation service was discontinued and the riders traveled in private vehicles, the 85 urban Public transportation service provides many additional benefits in the corridors and areas it serves. Access to jobs, shops, medical, school and other destinations for those who do not have access to private transportation may provide more societal benefits than the congestion relief, but this report only examined part of the mobility aspect. Typically, in contrast to roads, the ridership is concentrated in a relatively small portion of the urban area. That is often the In the 85 urban areas studied there were approximately 43 billion passenger-miles of travel on public transportation systems in 2003 (1). The annual travel ranges from an average of 17 million miles per year in Small urban areas to about 2.7 billion miles in Very Large areas. Overall, if these riders did not have access to public transportation systems, the 1.1 billion hours of additional roadway delay would represent a 27 percent increase in delay and an additional congestion cost of $18 billion. Read the academic, non-partisan, government-funded study yourself: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility_report_2005.pdf » reply
JK: Roland, I posted a verySubmitted by jim karlock on Thu, 10/26/2006 - 11:12pm.
JK: Roland, I posted a very important comment affecting Portland’s long term future & you seem to have ignored it. Please respond to the following that I posted a few days ago - it gets to the very heart of the debate about Portland’s future: Roland Chlapowski Another non-sequitor from free the market faithful - who are not overly concerned with finding evidence or data to back their elegant theories up. You have no evidence because EVERY ONE of the above statements is provable false, although many are popularly held by planners. Thanks » reply
finannly someone who will take on the congestion issue head onSubmitted by Ully on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 9:20am.
sam - pay no attention to the usual knee-jerk conservative naysayers. you are fighting to keep portland moving and i and many more are greatful for your leadership. » reply
THANK YOU TO SAM AND TEAM!!Submitted by Pamela Ferguson on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 11:33am.
I live on Hayden Island and love it! I want to thank Sam Adams and his team for their hard work! Hayden Island has lots of issues that will not be solved overnight but I am in favor of the building moratorium based on the fact that we need to "slow down" the process here. The island needs a plan for the future! I have great hopes that Hayden Island will some day be a fabulous pedestrian friendly destination with bike paths, city parks, river access for boat rides, intrepretive centers, unique shopping, eating, dancing, dreaming by the Columbia River! "Come and play at the River!" Hope to see everyone October 04 at 6pm at City Hall! Thanks again, Sam! Pamela Ferguson » reply
Hayden Island CongestionSubmitted by esther wright on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 1:13pm.
I love Portland and I love Hayden Island..but I had no idea when I moved here that I would be dealing with horrendous traffic on I-5 from 2:00 pm until dark. I appreciate what Sam is doing on my behalf and welcome any actions that support the quality of life for folks on Hayden Island. » reply
I also want to thank Sam forSubmitted by Lee on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 1:47pm.
I also want to thank Sam for proposing a moratorium for Hayden Island and North Macadam. Recognizing that infrastructure-transportation improvements- have to meet the density/planning in place and planned is honorable and needed. » reply
Lee: I also want to thankSubmitted by jim karlock on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 12:30am.
Lee: I also want to thank Sam for proposing a moratorium for Hayden Island and North Macadam. JK: North Macadam too! Thanks » reply
on -I-5 now and stuck in traficSubmitted by stuck in traffic now on Thu, 09/28/2006 - 3:42pm.
i am stuck in traffix on hayden island right now » reply
stuck in traffic now: i amSubmitted by jim karlock on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 12:32am.
stuck in traffic now: i am stuck in traffix on hayden island right now Thanks » reply
Sam wants people stuck inSubmitted by Sid on Fri, 09/29/2006 - 7:27pm.
Sam wants people stuck in traffic That's why he is pushing light rail on to any adopted crossing plan. » reply
Actually No reply-Traffic StudySubmitted by Jerry on Mon, 10/02/2006 - 11:35pm.
Actually No, your post above is mostly wrong. Yes there was a traffic study for NM, but it was completed back in the mid 1990s based on a much different build-out for NM and assuming 40% transit ridership. Plus it did NOT include several of the transportation "solutions" that are now being proposed, like the South Portal project. A traffic study based on 10,000 new jobs and 2000 housing units is much different than what is occuring in NM. That changes the traffic study results significantly. Also, we are experiencing failures of some of the solutions just completed. The new double lane off-ramp from I-5 widened from a one lane off-ramp with installation of two additional light controls and lane boundaries has created chaos for north bound Macadam. We now have back-up of traffic clear to SW Boundary, 15 blocks south; and we've had accidents. Four days ago I witnessed an almost tragic accident as a car coming off I-5 didn't see the first traffic light and ran a redlight going over 55mph and missed a car by inches coming from the right hand lanes. Death will occur there soon. Five light sequences to get through these lights is an "F" level of service, and that is regarded as a "solution" for NM? Then consider the south portal proposed solution at SW Bancroft and Macadam. The dated traffic study estimates 48,000 vehicular trips generated from NM and they guessed that 60% of those trips will be going south through the SW Bancroft portal. Can you imagine the additional 30,000 trips per day going through the intersection that is already a blind death trap as SW Macadam swings blindly under I-5 going south-and already has 30,000 south trips per day? The NM URAC recognizes that the so-called, old study is old, not reality; and has voted to have an updated study that also considers the impediment to intermodal transportation issues. NM is going to impact interstate and city commerce-just like Hayden Island. Even the land owners of NM recognize this and are deeply concerned-except for Homer Williams who once said in a public meeting-"I don't care about traffic, I'll be out of there". That is why even the new condo owners are interested in this issue-they may be required to pay into a Local Improvement District to help pay for the transportation projects identified. This was suggested by PDOT at our last URAC meeting. Hold on to your billfolds, condo owners because as Commissioner Adams even admits on his blog(commissionersam.com) NM Transportation Projects are underfunded/not funded by minimum $170M. Is that a solution, Actually No? Then consider that you are in NM and want to go north on I-5. You will be required to go south to SW Bancroft joining the other 30,000 trips wanting to go south and proceed through that backup so you can go north on Macadam through two lights mentioned above that are already backed up 15 blocks. Then you will then finally come to the I-5 signaled on-ramp as you join the typical north bound I-5 traffic inching up the Marquam Bridge approach (if it is moving at all). Good luck, and have at least 1/2 tank of gas. Gridlock. This is PDOT planning. And this is why the ODOT representative stopped attending all the NM Traffic Subcommittee meetings in the mid 90s because he saw the reality. This is criminal because state law requires infrastructure to be inplace before development can occur. The City has used this "finding" to tell other developments/developers they could not support/approve a project-why not for NM? Adams is proposing a moratorium for Hayden Island for this reason, thank god he sees the reality in North Macadam. Only kidding. » reply
Hayden Island CongestionSubmitted by Mary on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:47pm.
I have lived on Hayden Island for 12 years and I love it. There is potential to make Hayden Island even better for Portland, the business and resident community, and visitors. We need a well thought out transportation plan to make this possible. I fully support the moratorium. » reply
Hayden Island building moritoriumSubmitted by Carol Nichols on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:58am.
Sam: I attended the first Hayden Island (Walmart)meeting at City Hall. I support your idea for a moritorium for any new businesses or buildings (especially Walmart) to move into the Hayden Island area. I work for the teachers union (OEA) and have an aversion to Walmart in particular. I like your idea to wait and plan out strategies for future building in the area. I live on N. Bridgeton Road and with the new Hotels and family homes already in place I have noticed traffic has increased. It seems there is always a hold-up trying to cross the bridge (or in my case just getting from my house to the store at Jantzen Beach). Thank you for all your hard work! Carol » reply
Hayden Island's FutureSubmitted by Jan Hamer, Jantzen Beach Moorage Manager on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 4:27pm.
It all started with a memo that stated that there was a large retailer interested in a store on the site now occupied by the Thunderbird Hotel on the west side of I-5. HINooN, the island’s association of residents and business leaders began having meetings on the subject. This quickly grew into a large consortium of island people who began having meetings and debating the question of: Do we want a Wal-Mart or any other retail business or other entity that would bring in more high volumes of traffic to the island? This island is already on the verge of traffic gridlock. We were all invited to an island town hall meeting at the old Hayden Island Yacht Club. There was a very large turn out. Several meetings later the group decided that a neighborhood plan for the island was needed now. This led to the possibility that the City of Portland may have resources for the temporary future development moratorium that would be needed to allow the time necessary to develop a good long term neighborhood plan. The city must first approve it. Several moorage residents and the JBMI moorage manager attended a City Council meeting a short time ago and officially requested the City’s help in instituting a Development Moratorium. This brings us to where we are today. I manage a floating home community with over 300 residents. Our community lives, works and sleeps here. We want the community to grow within a balance plan of residential, commercial growth while maintaining mutual livability. We respectfully request Mayor Tom Potter and the council support and vote to adopt the ordinance for the moratorium. We desperately need time to plan Hayden Island’s future. » reply
shopping moves northSubmitted by john on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 12:05am.
Another shopping area bites the dust. I'm sure the new Hayden Island will be a wonderful place with expensive floating homes and moorages. You don't like Jantzen beach, I understand, but why the heck did you move there, then? But where will we put the retail for northern Portland? Gridlock will continue because Vancouver will happily take up the slack. » reply
Outside Experts paid by the City of Portland?Submitted by Bruce on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 8:04pm.
Well, if they came from the Outside, and they're Experts...I guess there's no possibility they are advancing anybody's political agenda. Sam: can I hire my own outside experts to review Macadam? If these experts give it an "F", would you support a moratorium in SoWa? How about if the outside experts conclude that building a two lane replacement for the Sellwood Bridge would not meet the current demand at peak hours? Not to mention future traffic growth. Would you be willing to funnel some Federal choo-choo dollars into a 4 lane Sellwood Bridge replacement? Fair is fair, right? The Outside Experts tell me so. » reply
PDX and Housing... Why???Submitted by Rita Beigh on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 8:45am.
Dear Commissioner Adams, It has been some time since I last contacted you. I believe you are doing a valuable service to the City of Portland in general. In specific, I believe that the entire City Council, yourself included, and the Mayor are doing a great disservice to the general population of the PDX metro area. Why is it that every time I turn around I see low-cost housing being razed and replaced by hyper-expensive condos. Case in point: "The Civic". What was torn down at that site were low cost 1 BR and Studio apartments that many people on fixed income could afford. What is replacing it? High rise condos the least expensive of which is a postage stamp size studio unit for just under $300,000. South Waterfront? Who is going to be able to live there? Certainly none of the labor force that is building it. By catering to the developers our city's government is exiling regular people like myself to the hinterlands. I just want to know why you people are allowing this to happen? Is it for the increased tax revenue? Is it because people who don't drive $40,000 cars and cannot afford to live in $300,000+ domiciles are just no longer welcome here? I was born in Portland and raised here. I sure as heck cannot afford to live here, though. Why? » reply
The monitoring of suchSubmitted by Pinnacle Security on Thu, 11/20/2008 - 5:32am.
The monitoring of such creation may be really accurate since the process of building it is innovative. This is a fascinating masterpiece. » reply
Post new comment |
NavigationGet Our UpdatesRecent blog postsSam's Snapshots
Recent comments
 Popular contentToday's:  Syndicate |
Home |
Sam's Calendar |
Sam's Priorities |
Sam's Portfolio |
I Want To... |
Your Neighborhood |
Archives
PRINT
Wow!
I had my doubts about whether or not this was just about stopping Wal-Mart. After paging through the data, I can see why you are pushing for a development moratorium on Hayden Island. One question, how long will it take to break ground on a new bridge?