The drivel never ends

Up Sucker Creek thought the Lake Oswego Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory was a waste of resources.  And some of those resources undoubtedly produced GHG, so that was a double insult to the idea of scientific, data-driven political policies.  It demonstrates that if a group continually confounds the purpose of a study, the resulting policies are corrupt along with the data that was created to support them.

An example of government (and consultant) fuzzy thinking is the assumption that the carbon footprint of materials consumption is based on the wealth of its citizens:  Median household income for the Portland metropolitan area is greater than the national average. It is assumed that this difference results in more purchased goods by residents.  A higher income means more goods and materials consumed and more GHG emitted.  Lake Oswego's GHG Inventory was done by the same company and uses the same metric, so our GHG emissions are assumed to be even higher!  And for transportation, people with higher incomes travel by air more, and planes emit huge amounts of GHG, therefore LO scores poorly on transportation also!  

Q:  How many bike paths will it take to counteract LO's high income in order to lower our (assumed) high GHG emissions?  Or should Lake Oswego residents become less wealthy in order to be more "green?"  Perhaps what they say about assumptions is true after all - either that or there are a lot of gullible and guilt-ridden people out there who love paying for this junk.

For anyone who still thinks government is not involved in behavioral change or social engineering, the excerpts below reveal the extent to which Metro (and the State) is willing to go in its tyrannical quest to further its Master Plan.  A government not of the people but to rule the people.
To see the Metro Regional Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Click Here.   To see the Lake Oswego Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, Click Here.

ALL GOVERNMENT STUDIES, STAFF REPORTS, ETC. NEED TO BE TESTED AGAINST LOGIC, REAL DATA, AND THE OLD GUT CHECK AND GRAIN OF SALT.

TRUST BUT VERIFY.

Regional greenhouse gas inventory
The carbon footprint of residents and businesses inside the Portland metropolitan region 

Materials:
Second, the management of the more “upstream” portion of material flows offers many potential GHG-reducing opportunities, such as promoting new green purchasing strategies for businesses and consumers, reducing energy use, and supporting the internalization of the lifecycle carbon costs of goods into their price. While Metro’s role in materials management has traditionally focused on recycling and disposal, the relationships Metro has developed with households and businesses throughout the region may present collaborative opportunities to lower the region’s greenhouse gas emissions from material use. 

Consultants move around the region and state, reaping the rewards of state mandates and sustainability decrees.  The Good Company (partial) list of clients:

Government and Public Administration:

Battelle Energy Alliance Business Oregon Center for Climate Strategies City of Beaverton, Oregon City of Corvallis City of Eugene, Oregon City of Gresham, Oregon City of Hillsboro, Oregon City of Lake Oswego, Oregon City of Portland, Oregon Bureau of Planning and Sustainability City of Vancouver, Washington Clackamas County, Oregon Colorado Department of Transportation EnviroIssues Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development Idaho National Laboratory

Lane Council of Governments Lane Regional Air Protection Agency Massachusetts Highway Department Metro Regional Government, Oregon Oregon Built Environment & Sustainable Technologies Center Oregon Department of Energy Oregon Department of Human Services Oregon Department of Transportation Oregon Housing and Community Services Oregon Solutions Oregon University System Portland Development Commission Rogue Valley Council of Governments Washington County, Oregon Washington State Department of Ecology

Go to Open City Hall by 5:00 pm!

For anyone who has procrastinated, you have today until 5:00 pm to let the City Council know what you think they should be working on for the next year.  The easiest ways are to send an email to the council, or to go to Open City Hall on the city website and comment there.

When you get to the page with the space for statements, you may also look up what other people are saying by clicking on "Feedback."  You may leave your name with your comment or just your neighborhood and remain anonymous.  The clock is ticking!  By the way, there was a good turnout at the Open House on Wednesday night - lots of new faces!

          What do you want the Council to focus on in 2014?

                                     The deadline is near

This topic has an introduction from the City of Lake Oswego, 99 visitors and 27 statements. The deadline for participation is 5:00 PM on January 10, 2014.

Call me puzzled, or just curious

Up Sucker Creek has been ruminating on this for some time:  What is the marketing plan for the mixed-use apartment development on Block 137 downtown?

• Lake Oswego is hardly a hot spot for younger people to move to, professionals or not.  Ask a Millennial or Gen-X person what they think about living in the 'burbs, and unless they are married and either have children or will have children, moving out of the city is not a good way to meet other singles and engage in a active social life.  Especially if moving to the suburbs means paying a premium price for luxury digs - now the pool of renters narrows real fast.  

• Just wondering - how many oder, empty-nesters are looking for apartments if they can afford condominiums?  Looking at the design of the building with the commercial below, the park on one side and a tight courtyard in the center, this will be rather dense living arrangements.  Is this the luxury lifestyle well-to-do oldsters are looking for?  

• Vacancy rates in Lake Oswego have regularly been higher than most markets in the a metro area. (MMHA).  The high vacancy rates are surprising given Lake Oswego posts among the highest rents of suburban markets..  

• A 367-unit apartment complex is coming on line this year near Bridgeport in Tualatin.  The Portland region is expecting an additional 15,000 units in the near future with those that are under construction, permitted or in the design phase.  In a year or two, the market absorption may be high enough to begin to lower occupancy rates and then rents.  

• Mixed-use has to be right for the commercial and the tenant mix and the market cycles between them.  Too many retail mixed-use in the Pearl District has been a disaster for some building owners with vacant storefronts.  But the planners wanted the retail, so that's what was put in for vibrancy.  Will this make the project more or less successful? 

I am puzzled as to what the marketing strategy for this project is.  I am more interested since public money is going to support some portion of it.   If this elephant flies, how high will she go, and how far will she get? 

Wizer Block smack down

Oops!  Not Lake Oswego.  

Anyway, enjoy the awe inspiring Corn Palace in Mitchell, South Dakota.

The Development Review Commission will take a look at the Evergreen Group's application for a permit to build that big, blocky thing in downtown Lake Oswego.  The DRC smack down will occur on the 22nd at City Hall.  There are a lot of documents associated with the application that are now posted to the project webpage - check them out at:  DRC permit review.  FYI: Anyone who does not testify at this hearing will not be able to appeal the DRC's decision to Council later on.

Hearing is January 22, 2014 at 6 PM at City Hall 

in the Council Chambers

This hearing will be televised on TVCTV Channel 28.

The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Review Permit to construct a mixed use project, including up to 228 residential units and 28,000 square feet of commercial use in three buildings, with the following Exceptions to the Community  Development Code standards:

• Residential uses on the ground floor in EC zone [LOC 50.03.003.1.e.ii]
• Fifth floor on a portion of each of the three buildings [LOC 50.05.004.5.d]
• Reduced amount of storefront glazing [LOC 50.05.004.6.b.i]
• Retail parking entrance on 1st Street [LOC 50.05.004.10.b]
• Shared private/public parking provided on-site [LOC 50.06.002]
• Driveway grades (limited to the 25-foot landing area of the commercial underground parking structure) [LOC 50.06.003.2.b.iii(3)]

And the removal of 25 trees to accommodate the development.

Perhaps because it's wet and rainy...

Perhaps because it's wet and rainy, or because the news is full stories of sub-zero weather, I am inspired to share this story I saw on CBS this week.  The still pictures are spectacular, but make sure to watch the video too!  Amazing.  

Hawaii photographer catches waves on camera

OAHU, Hawaii -- On the North Shore of the Hawaiian island of Oahu, Clark Little used to head into the water on a surfboard. Now he conquers the big surf with nothing more than flippers and a camera.

Transportation System Plan updates

Calendar Correction:  The TSPAC meeting scheduled for tonight, Wed., January 8, was cancelled, however the TAB will be meeting without the technical committee members present at 7:00 pm in the City Council chambers at City Hall.  

So far, the actual TSP Update has not been released.  The document is undergoing changes because of the shift in directions by the new City Council.  It is Up Sucker Creek's understanding that after (how long?) over a year of work on the document, the Council-appointed Transportation Advisory Board has not yet seen the draft TSP and has had no direct input except as part of the limited TSPAC. meetings  Corrections are welcome if this information is not correct!

Here are some of the Public Works and Planning Departments' work that is on the web.  Please be advised that this is not current.  The handouts from their December meeting (the most current information available to the public, though not online) will be scanned by your hard-working reporter and posted here shortly.  

This is a link to a technical memo from Kittelson Associates Inc. (KAI), sent to Lake Oswego (department or person?). Lots of information on current conditions and recommendations about how the city might change transportation conditions/options to facilitate growth.  

City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan Update 
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date: April 3, 2013 Project #: 11187 
To: Project Management Team

Cc: Transportation System Plan Advisory Committee

From:  Erin Ferguson, PE; Jessica Horning; Jesse Boudart; Phill Worth

Project: City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan Update

Subject: Technical Memorandum 7.1 Existing Conditions 

http://welovelakeoswego.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/LO_TSP_ExCond_TM7_041013_ss1.pdfdf

Design Guidelines  (Pg. 29)
Technical Memo 4.1 Modal Plans includes a summary of existing roadway design standards in Lake Oswego. Bike lanes are currently included in the design standards for arterial and collector streets; the design standards also recommend sidewalks on both sides of the street on all street types. Technical Memo 4.1 also includes discussion questions to determine potential changes to design standards in order to preserve design flexibility while increasing the availability and attractiveness of transportation options. This discussion will inform future TSP development tasks. 

* * * * *

Up Sucker Creek lives on a collector street - a lovely residential road with sidewalks on both sides and room to park cars on the sides of the street.  There are a couple of young boys who ride bikes around, and a few scattered oldsters stretching their legs.  According to the KAI crash study for LO, there have been no bike crashes, or crashes of any type in this neighborhood in the last 5 years.  But bike lanes on both sides of the street?  If this were to occur, all that would accomplish is an additional expense for the city, and the removal of parking spaces for the neighborhood.  The objective for this type of street design seems dubious - more of a knee-jerk wish to make the city into a Portland-style biking community.  Is this what the public really wants?

MPOs - Metro'$ power grab (Part 3)

Rent-seeking behavior:   When a company, organization or individual uses their resources to obtain an economic gain from others.  An example of rent seeking is when a company lobbies the government for loan subsidies, grants, or tariff protection which redistributes resources from the taxpayers to the special interest group.  

* * * * *

Who's goals dominate in land use planning?  Governments that pass regulations and requirements on to local entities and may withhold funding if compliance is not forthcoming

Who gains?  The development industry (displaying rent-seeking behavior) who win special advantages from government funding.

Who pays?  There is only one source of funding for all government spending.  

In all of Metro's plans, they name their "project partners."  This is extremely important, because without the willing participation of local entities, Metro's plans would come to naught. None of this can be done without an IGA - an Intergovernmental Agreement, signed by the local government.  What we do, we do to our selves.  

The issue for citizens at the local (and state) level is whether or not the federal (and state) density and transit goals and their modes of implementation are compatible with local ideas.  And if not, what amount of money is worth submitting to a foreign vision of  the local landscape?  

How can a city accommodate growth on its own terms?  For all Metro's assumed power, it is the citizens, working at the local level that should determine their landscape and their future.  Growth will happen, and cities need to plan for it, but cities also need to protect a quality of life and independence that money can't buy.  

MPOs - Metro'$ power grab (Part 2)

MPOs are the pass-through entities for federal transportation dollars as established by and amended by congress.

Wikipedia:  The United States Congress passed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962, which required the formation of an MPO for any urbanized area (UZA) with a population greater than 50,000. Federal funding for transportation projects and programs are channeled through this planning process. Congress created MPOs in order to ensure that existing and future expenditures of governmental funds for transportation projects and programs are based on a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (“3‑C”) planning process. Statewide and metropolitan transportation planning processes are governed by federal law (23 

A 2005 survey of MPOs nationally commissioned in preparation of "Special Report 288" of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies found that "forecast by negotiation" was a common method of projecting future population and employment growth for use in travel forecasting, suggesting rent-seeking behavior on the part of MPO committees influencing the technical staff.^[2]

*****************************************************************************

Negotiated Forecast:  where each functional area makes its own independent forecasts, but representatives from each functional area get together each forecasting period to reach final negotiated forecasts.  Practical Guide to Business Forecasting, ed. by Chaman L. Jain & Jack Malehorn

Rent-seeking behavior:   When a company, organization or individual uses their resources to obtain an economic gain from others.  An example of rent seeking is when a company lobbies the government for loan subsidies, grants, or tariff protection which redistributes resources from the taxpayers to the special interest group.

* * * * *

Metro's goals, and its sole propose, is as a Metropolitan Planning Organization.  It does not exist in order to own and operate a zoo, or purchase and operate parks, or have a plant nursery and gardening program.  These have been additions to Metro's mission creep aided by voter bond measures and public mandates to increase Metro's power and reach.  In other words, we are now wrestling with the monster we created.

A look at Metro's Regional Transportation Plan, High Capacity Transit System Plan, Active Transportatipn Program, Regional Freight Plan, Mobility Corridors Plan... will show how Metro's plans look just like a lake Oswego's transportation plans.  (This is the same oth every locality.)

Local transportation system plans: Bringing the Regional Transportation Plan to life

PLANNING AND CONSERVATION  ›  REGIONAL PLANNING AND POLICY  ›  MPO FOR THE PORTLAND REGION  ›  LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLANS

Leaders from across the region adopted the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan in 2010, setting the direction for creating an innovative, sustainable transportation system. Learn how local transportation system plans will help bring about that vision.

• All jurisdictions do not have representation on advisory committees! So many voices are left out.
• The Lake Oswego Transportation Advisory Board will not see the Transportation System Plan until it is 100% done and presented to the public - so no citizen input has been involved in its construction.  Correction:  the TAB comments on TAP issues at meetings, but has not had input on actual written codes.
• The Lake Oswego TSP (Transportation System Plan) follows the Metro 2035 RTP 
• The Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan (Technical) Advisory Committee includes representatives from ODOT, Metro, Clackamas County, Trimet, consultants and city staff (Erica Rooney, Asst. City Engineer; Amanda Owings, Transportation Engineer and others)

Most people might think the Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan that becomes part of our Comprehensive Plan (which is a legal land use document) is created by and for the citizens of Lake Oswego.  It is a cooperative document that melds current LO geographic conditions with Metro regional transportation plans.  Under this system, it is impossible to say that our Comp Plan is a citizen-led plan and that it is there to serve the ideals and vision of the community.  It's a chicken and egg problem - trying to figure out whose plans came first and how much Lake Oswego residents got to say about any of it.

To see the TSPAC in action, attend their last meeting on Wed., Jan. 8 at 7:00 pm, city hall. It is instructive also to listen to the audio recording of their last meeting on December 11 to see how this group functions.  Given that the TAB did not meet 4 out of 12 months in 2013, their participation in city affairs has been at a low level despite the apparent lack of information from staff about the TSP.   Correction:  the TSPAC meeting was cancelled for Jan. 8 and will not meet again until the Feb. TAB meeting.

More on Metro'$ transportation plans for us in Part 3.

MPOs - Metro'$ power grab (Part 1)

MPO - Metropolitan Planning Organization
Background - these are only excerpts - read the entire Wikipedia page for more information.
From Wikipedia:

A metropolitan planning organization (MPO) is a federally mandated and federally funded transportation policy-making organization in the United States that is made up of representatives from local government and governmental transportation authorities. The United States Congress passed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962, which required the formation of an MPO for any urbanized area (UZA) with a population greater than 50,000. Federal funding for transportation projects and programs are channeled through this planning process. Congress created MPOs in order to ensure that existing and future expenditures of governmental funds for transportation projects and programs are based on a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (“3‑C”) planning process. Statewide and metropolitan transportation planning processes are governed by federal law (23 

Why MPOs are essential:

• Transportation investment means allocating scarce federal and other transportation funding resources appropriately;
• Planning needs to reflect the region’s shared vision for its future;
• Adequate transportation planning requires a comprehensive examination of the region’s future and investment alternatives; and
• An MPO is needed to facilitate collaboration of governments, interested parties, and residents in the planning process.

In other words, the federal government wished to see federal transportation funds spent in a manner that has a basis in metropolitan region-wide plans developed through intergovernmental collaboration, rational analysis, and consensus-based decision making.

Typically, an MPO governance structure includes a variety of committees as well as a professional staff. The “policy committee” is the top-level decision-making body for the planning organization. In most MPOs, the policy committee comprises:

• elected or appointed officials from local governmental jurisdictions such as municipalities or counties;
• representatives of different transportation modes, such as public transit, freight, bicycle/ pedestrian;
• state agency officials such as, state Department of Transportation, environmental agency, etc.;
• non-voting members such as FHWA, FTA, FAA, FRA, staff advisers from state departments of transportation, Chambers of Commerce

With only a few unique exceptions nationwide (such as the MPO in Portland, Oregon), MPO policy committee members are not elected directly by citizens. Rather, a policy committee member typically is an elected or appointed official of one of the MPO’s constituent local jurisdictions. The policy committee member thus has legal authority to speak and act on behalf of that jurisdiction in the MPO setting. 

The policy committee’s responsibilities include debating and making decisions on key MPO actions and issues, including adoption of the metropolitan long-range transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, annual planning work programs, budgets, and other policy documents. The policy committee also may play an active role in key decision points or milestones associated with MPO plans and studies, as well as conducting public hearings and meetings. An appointed advisory committee (CAC) develops the recommendations for consideration by the policy committee and establishes a ranked proposal for work plans.

The technical committee typically comprises staff-level officials of local, state, and federal agencies. In addition, a technical committee may include representatives of interest groups, various transportation modes, and local citizens. A 2005 survey of MPOs nationally commissioned in preparation of "Special Report 288" of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies found that "forecast by negotiation" was a common method of projecting future population and employment growth for use in travel forecasting, suggesting rent-seeking behavior on the part of MPO committees influencing the technical staff.^[2]

*******************************************************************************

METRO is the MPO for the Portland metropolitan area.  Continue reading for more about MPOs and Metro.

Wizer Block DRC review date set

As reported in the new Hello LO, the Development Review Commission (DRC) is "scheduled to review and receive public testimony on the Development Review application submitted by the Evergreen Group LLC for the proposed mixed-use development for Block 137 in downtown Lake Oswego.... The DRC is responsible for ensuring that the application complies with applicable City Code requirements for new developments in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District."

Development Review Commission

Public Hearing
January 22, 2014

6:00 pm*

City Council Chambers, City Hall

* Note:  Hello LO lists the time at 7:00 pm, but the hearing notice online says 6:00 pm.  Be sure to check with the city regarding the correct time, or come early, just in case.

Website for the project is:  Click Here

EPA's tendency to distort science

Wall Street Journal
January 3, 2014

Letters to the Editor

'Peer Review' Doesn't Mean What You Think It Does

The EPA's tendency to distort science to fit policy has long been criticized not only by outside scientific groups but also by its own extramural advisers.

The EPA's tendency to distort science to fit policy has long been criticized not only by outside scientific groups but also by its own extramural advisers. An expert panel commissioned by then-EPA administrator William Reilly reported in 1992 that: (a) "The science advice function—that is, the process of ensuring that policy decisions are informed by a clear understanding of the relevant science—is not well defined or coherently organized within EPA"; (b) "In many cases, appropriate science advice and information are not considered early or often enough in the decision-making process"; (c) Although "EPA should be a source of unbiased scientific information . . . EPA has not always ensured that contrasting, reputable scientific views are well-explored and well-documented." And most damning of all, that (d) "EPA science is perceived by many people, both inside and outside the Agency, to be adjusted to fit policy." Those people were—and are—right.

During the more than two decades since that report, it appears that nothing has changed.

Henry I. Miller, M.D.

Hoover Institution

Stanford, Calif.

Tigard Measure charts future of region (Part 2)

The Central Planners canNOT let Tigard citizens stand in the way of creating TODs and dense communities in the SW corner of the region. If Tigard measure backers are successful at retaining local control, it will mark the first of what may be more legal barriers by cities to density as envisioned by Metro.  Clackamas County citizens voted to limit rail development in the county, but still leaves the door open for BRT with dedicated lanes.

If anyone recalls, BRT was an option for the Portland to Lake Oswego transit plan, but there isn't the option to cannibalize 2 lanes of traffic for dedicated lanes. A hybrid system using other technologies would work, but the Central Planners don't talk about this - it's all or nothing with them.  And probably the developers who see the dedicated lines as a permanent commitment to high capacity transit that can't be changed like ordinary bus routes.

Developers do not want any risk anymore.  They do not operate with a capitalist, market economy except when it's time to take the built-in profits.  The risk is always borne by the public when new transit and urban renewal dollars (taxes) are being spent.  This cozy relationship between developers and government Central Planners cannot happen without agreement by local elected officials, even ones who vow to fight against density.  They most likely feel they must bow before Metro's authority instead of exploring how they might exercise their rights as a Home Rule government.

This article from today's Oregonian is another view of the Tigard citizen-led measure to control high capacity transit in their town.

Washington County rapid transit forum scheduled amid Tigard ballot measure battle
Oregonian, January 3, 2014
By Fenit Nirappil

An upcoming vote in Tigard has the potential to derail years of planning for beefed-up public transportation in southeast Washington County.

Amid this backdrop, Washington County Democrats are hosting a rapid transit forum  with elected officials and activists in King City Wed. Jan. 8. The forum will be held 7 p.m. at the King City Club House, 15245 SW 116th Ave..

Tigard measure charts future of region (Part 1)

This wek's issue of the Times reports on a measure the citizens of the city will get to vote on in March.  With this measure, the originators are trying to give its citizens, not Metro, the state or the Feds or even their own city council, a direct say in what they want their city to be like in the future.

As you read through the article, note that the transit options are not just to create a congestion relieve valve for current area residents, but are to further the goal of dense development along the transit corridor.  That, my loyal readers, is the whole objective of high capacity transit is to be the catalyst for increased density in the suburbs, not to be of any benefit to current residents.

This measure is aboout preserving the current streets for automobiles AND preserving the quality of life in Tigard for the people who call it home.  Without light rail, heavy rail, streetcars, buses with dedicated road lanes AND urban renewal money, developers would not be at all interested in building high-density and/or mixed use projects anywhere other than in the popular parts of inner Portland.  How far will the Central Planners get before we the people "get" what this expensive and disruptive, transformational game is all about?  

  High capacity transit = high density  

Tigard transit initiative touches a nerve
The Times, December 26, 2013
By, Jim Redden

Excerpts:

Ballot Measure 34-210 opposes new high-capacity corridor projects in Tigard. It was placed on the March 11 special election ballot by activists opposed to Metro’s Southwest Corridor Project. They do not believe that either transit option being studied — a new light-rail line or a bus rapid-transit line with dedicated lanes — would reduce congestion. Instead, they think it will be used to increase density throughout the corridor.

That's the whole point.  Read the Tigard Triangle Plan for details.

“Replacing car lanes with a MAX train or dedicated bus line will increase congestion,” says measure supporter Art Crino, the initiative’s co-petitioner. “People want to live in houses with a back yard big enough for a swing set for their kids.”

And that's exactly what Metro does NOT want.  Central Planners do not like local control. 

The fight over the measure is expected to kick into high gear after the first of the year. Supporters have already filed their campaign committee, the Roads Not Rail Committee, with the Oregon secretary of state’s office. Murphy says his committee, called Stop Congestion, Vote No Committee, should be filed soon. And the first public forum is already scheduled.

Supporters and opponents are set to square off at 7 p.m. on Jan. 8 at the King City Club House, 15245 S.W. 116th Ave. It is organized by the Democratic Party of Washington County. “This issue is extremely important for the Southwest Portland, Tigard, Sherwood and Tualatin areas, as it will impact future transportation and planning for the next 20 years,” according to an announcement for the forum.

The current version of the [SW Corridor Plan] does not simply call for a new high-capacity corridor between Portland and Tualatin. It also involves a wide range of other projects along the corridor, including new pedestrian and bike paths, zoning changes to allow new residential and commercial development, and the preservation of existing natural areas and open spaces. The first transit project envisioned in the plan is the expansion of TriMet bus service within the corridor.

The SW Corridor Plan includes Lake Oswego's western end at Kruse Way and Boones Ferry Rd.

“Why does it have to be either a light-rail line or a bus line with dedicated lanes? Why not just run more buses on the existing roads?” asks Crino, a retiree.  

Because if you were given a choice you might like, Metro's goals for high density suburbs are limited.  Metro only gives people choices that they favor.

“I’m a strong believer in democracy, and nobody better mess with my right to vote, but the requirements in the measure would be difficult to comply with,” Murphy says.

When anyone follows, "I'm a strong believer in democracy" with a "but" - Watch Out!  Probably your democratic rights of self government have just been erased just a bit more in favor of the Central Planners.  

Get rid of the old

Words and phrases to get rid of in 2014: 

How many times have you heard the word "vibrant" and wanted to pull your hair out?  You'd laugh at  the pretentiousness of the word if it weren't so annoying by now.

It's a new year, and time to make resolutions about vocabulary by brushing up on the meanings of words that either enhance or obfuscate communication.

 Here are my suggestions for words that are so overused they have lost their original meaning, some that have a meaning different from the dictionary version, and some that are just plain annoying.

Vibrant - it's everywhere -  it's fingernails-on-the-blackboard, grit-your-teeth irritating.  It's so overused it's getting to be a joke and needs to go away.

Vision -  doesn't mean much to anyone who wasn't clued in on the visionary vision in the first place.

Walkable - what city planners mean is not what you may think.  City personnel should spell out what these normal sounding words mean in the context they are being used, otherwise no one knows what is intended.  Is that the intent?  Otherwise, assume the word to be code for the "20-minute neighborhood."

Affordable - another of those words that has a meaning other than the commonly understood, dictionary definition.  How does the average person know what "affordable" means if it isn't made plain?

Low-income - and yet another double-meaning word.  The planning world is a mine field of tricky words.  If you don't know the rules, you can't play the game.  "Low-income" is the federal term for anyone making less than 80% of the median area income.

X - shed - any word that is put before "shed" creates a silly hybrid such as: bikeshed, walkshed, foodshed, transitshed, and you-name-it-shed.  Plain English please.

Sense of place and Sense of community - there is a feeling of attachment one has about the place one lives that comes from the relationship with the people and the physical place itself.  This relationship evolves over time.  But planners use these terms as if these are something that can be manufactured, as in: "The complete streets will create a sense of community."  As good as urban design gets, it cannot create a community or a sense of place, and it is hubris to think or say so.

Healthy - why would anyone want to plan for anything to be unhealthy?  This is so obvious it's a waste of a good word.

Food Access - is there anyone in Lake Oswego who does not have physical access to fresh, "healthy" food?   How do these things keep creeping into our bloated government regulations?

Additions:
Tool and Toolbox - as in : "That's just one tool in the toolbox we can use."  "Kit" has same meaning.

The list can go on, but this is a good start.  How about you?  What are your favorite government words to get rid of?

Image is of a Chilhuly glass exhibit and is an example of "vibrant" on a Google image search of the word "vibrant."  Text is from the Tacoma, Washington city website. (The Chilhuly glass art is located in Tacoma.)

Our goal is to guide community growth and development in a manner that protects environmental resources, enhances quality of life, promotes distinctive neighborhoods and a vibrant downtown, and involves citizens in the decisions that affect them.  

In case you missed it - meeting dates for your calendar

In case you missed this, here are important dates for upcoming city meetings:

Mark your calendars and prepare your input for the following important meetings.  Several key meetings are being held in the first full week of January, so this week is particularly busy.  Try to make as many meetings as possible and/or email or call your city council members with your comments.  The Comp Plan is in its FINAL round of hearings as a complete document and the Transportation System Plan is nearing completion and due for public input.

Attend the open House on the 8th (or send an email) to let your council know what you want and don't want from your city government.  This is your big chance to be heard before events take place!


1/7   |   Tue.  |  City Council Mtg.  |  7:00 pm  |  City Hall

1/8   |  Wed.  |   City Council Open House / Reception  |  5:30 - 7:30 pm  |  WEB Willamette Rm.

                          Invitation to public to share ideas for 2014 City Council goals

1/8   |  Wed.  |   Transportation Advisory Board  |  7-9 pm  |  City Hall
                          Meeting with TSP Advisory Committee to review Transportation System Plan 
                          update.  Change:  the TSPCA will not meet until the next TAB meeting in Feb.  
                          This meeting will be a TAB regular meeting.  Mike Keenan has replaced Frank
                          Groznik on the TAB.  

1/8   |  Wed.  |   Tigard High Capacity Transit Forum   |  7 - 9 pm  |  King City Club Jouse
                         Forum on SW Corridor Plan transit options - Pro and Con for ballot measure

1/9   |  Thur.  |   Comp Plan CAC  |  4-6 pm  |  Main Fire Station, 300 B Ave.  
                          Review Comp Plan Consolidated Package

1/9   |   Thur. |   Trimet meeting on SW Service Enhancement Plan  |  6:30 - 8:30 pm  |  WEB
                          Public input on bus service enhancements

1/11  |   Sat.   |   City Council Goal Planning Session  |  9:00 - 3:00  |  Holy Names Heritage 
                          Center, Mary's Woods

1/13  |  Mon.  |   Planning Commission  |  6:30 pm  |  City Hall
                          Public Hearing on LU 13-0068, Comp Plan Amendments (Consolidated Package)
                          Testimony must be turned in by 5 pm on 1/13.  Click for Public Hearing Notice 

1/13  |  Mon.  |   DRC Public Hearing  |  6:00 pm*  |  City Hall
                          Hearing on Wizer Block development  |   *contact city for correct time

1/27  |  Mon.  |   Transportation Advisory Board Open House  |  4:30-6:30 pm  |  City Hall
                           Presentation of the Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update Draft to the public

1/27  |  Mon.  |   Planning Commission  |  6:30 pm  |  City Hall
                          Transportation System Plan update work session

1/29. |  Wed.  |   Trimet Transit on Tap  |  5-7 pm  |  Max's Fanno Creek Brew Pub, Tigard
                          Talk on:  What is BRT?  

2/24  |  Mon.  |   Planning Commission  |  6:30 pm  |  City Hall
                           Public Hearing on the TSP.  No details yet.  Date may change.

Note:  The TSP Update Draft has not been made available to the public as yet, though Up Sucker Creek will continue trying in order to report to readers what steps have been taken so far and what preliminary plans have been made.  A request for information is in the works.  

Learn about SW Corridor transit and BRT

Trimet is holding local meetings pertaining to bus transportation for the cities in the SW Corridor (The Future of Transit), and another series of monthly talks that include a variety of transit topics (Transit on Tap).  The subject of late January's talk is understanding the Bus Rapid Transit System, or BRT.  

BRT figures as the chief transit option in the SW Corridor Transit System Plan and the Tigard Triangle transit-oriented development plan.  The BRT as being discussed has the potential of using up 2 of the 4 lanes on Hwy. 99, Barbur Blvd., and other streets, if the style of BRT selected is one that needs exclusive lanes for the buses rather than a hybrid system that operates on regular, unrestricted roads.  This is a critical distinction because federal funds are available for "New Starts" grant money, but only if 50% of existing roads are converted to transit use.  This option has the added benefit for 

Metro (or Trimet) does not need to cannibalize critical roadways in order to implement a BRT system - but it may be the only thing the public is told, or the decision that has already been made.  Excuse the cynicism, but after watching how the Locally Preferred Option for the Portland to Lake Oswego Streetcar was decided, it is not only plausible, but likely that the public has little to say about high-capacity transit decisions in the regions.  

The Future of Transit
Southwest Service Enhancement Plan

We are holding a series of community meetings about bus service improvements in Southwest Portland, Tigard, Tualatin, King City, Sherwood, Durham, Lake Oswego and West Linn.

Enjoy light refreshments and roll up your sleeves; you'll review maps and work with others to help determine the long-term vision of bus service in your area.  

Thursday, January 9, 6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
West End Building, Santiam Room
4101 SW Kruse Way, Lake Oswego

Transit on Tap

Talks will be held in meeting rooms at local brew pubs, where you will be able to sample what’s on tap while hearing from transit experts on a variety of topics.

All events are free and open to the public.

Pub-goers are responsible for purchasing their own food and beverages.

Upcoming talks:What is BRT?

Wednesday, January 29, 5–7 p.m.

Max’s Fanno Creek Brew Pub

12562 SW Main St

Tigard, OR 97223

February

TBD

New year, old tricks

Up Sucker Creek reported earlier about Metro's deal with a developer to help fund $60 million of a new convention center hotel using revenue bonds paid back with room taxes generated by the hotel.  (Borrowed money is always more than the principal, so $60 million is only what the developer would receive, not what the public would pay.)

The funding scheme is a variant of the urban renewal boondoggle, but instead of robbing property taxes to pay bonds, this one uses tourism taxes.  Not much of a difference, but if all our taxes keep getting diverted to politicians' development dreams, where will the money come from to cover basic services?  Think about that when you hit that next pothole while an urban renewal area (or hotel) is given wads of money.

Not surprisingly, hoteliers from Portland are not pleased with the preferential treatment given to one, hotel they would be competing against - government should not be picking winners and losers  Their attempt get a county-wide vote to stop county money from going to the developer was blocked by Multnomah County Commissioners.

This behavior sounds just like what the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners did with rail funds a couple of years ago - they borrowed $20 million for the PMLR project a few days before a vote that would have blocked the expense. This was one of the reasons Charlotte Leahan was replaced as Commission Chair.  Government these days does not want citizens voting on funding for their projects, and they are rightly afraid a public vote will block foolish, or unfair, or costly spending.  The political fallout will eventually hit Multnomah County, and when it does, will it spark a change for the region?  Metro cannot let voters anywhere have their say or their money house of cards would fall.  Hmmm...  the power of the purse in the hands of the public?  Dangerous, or democratic?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Multnomah County blocks convention vote

At issue is $60 million public loan to fund hotel

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) - The public will not get to vote on plans to build a controversial convention center hotel in Portland.

A group opposed to the $60 million public loan that would fund hotel construction wanted to bring the issue to a public vote. But Multnomah County blocked that plan Tuesday.

County officials said the basis for the group's ballot initiative did not meet legal requirements.

The opposition group calls the county's decision an attempt to avoid public accountability. They're planning an appeal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From NWWatchdog.org,  1/11/13
Taxpayer Money Sought For Oregon Convention Center Hotel

“This is what happens,” said Heywood Sanders, a professor at the University of Texas at San Antonia who tracks the convention center industry. “There’s a cycle here. You build a center, it under performs what the consultant said so you then say how do we fix it.”

And the answer is more often than not, build a hotel.

Sanders said the drive to push forward with publicly funded projects stems from political pressure to fix up downtown districts or drive tourism.

“They keep trying,” he said. “Failure never breeds a serious reconsideration of the strategy. It simply breeds trying it again or doing more.