By the skin of their teeth!

The Tigard ballot measure requiring a public vote before Tigard can spend any time or money on planning for, amending maps for, regulating for, or building a high-capacity transit system appears to be passing.  The unofficial results, as published by the Washington County Election Division is below - about 200 votes separate the two sides.

However this election turns out in the official count, it would be nice to know why people voted the way they did.  In principal, Up Sucker Creek believes in and defends the public's right to vote on issues that can change their town significantly.

 
Next update: March 12, 2014 at 4:30 PM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY REPORT        Washington County, Oregon        unofficial 

Run Date:03/11/14     Special Election 

RUN TIME:10:18 PM     March 11, 2014 

                                                                                                      VOTES         PERCENT 

 PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 12) .   .  .   .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .         12              100.00 

 REGISTERED VOTERS -           TOTAL .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .     26,972 

 BALLOTS CAST -                       TOTAL.   .  .  .   .  .  .  .  .  . .   9,803 

 VOTER TURNOUT -                   TOTAL.  .  .   .   .  .   .  .  .  .                             36.35 

 34-210 City of Tigard
          Charter Amendment - Transit 

 VOTE FOR  1 

 Yes  .  .  .  .  .   .   .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .   .  .  .  .  .  .  .    4,997                50.98 

 No.  .  .  .   .   .   .  .  .  .  .   .   .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .   4,804                49.02

======================================================================

TSP Public Hearing Dates

The Planning Commission 

will hold a public hearing regarding 

the Transportation System Plan on 

March 24, 6:30 

in the Council Chambers at City Hall.  

Citizens may comment on any aspect of the Plan which includes these transportation project types:

• Trail system - local and regional
• Pathway - pedestrian only - typically asphalt
• Pathway - combined bike and pedestrian
• Sidewalks - concrete curb & gutter
• Bike path - shoulder, separated
• Roadway up-classifications
• Transit - bus routes and possible future HCT
• Did I forget anything?

Note:  Some pathways and bike paths appear to be recreational only and not intended for transportation - accomplishing daily tasks.  The TSP does not make that distinction even though some seem obviously one or the other.  Some local paths cut through private property - parking lots and at property lines - but these are not clearly marked either.  

City Traffic Engineer, Amanda Owings, may be able to help you if you have questions.

Read the documents at the Transportation Advisory Board webpage - you will need to unzip the files.  Once unzipped, there are two PDF files - one titled "Body" and the other labeled "Technical Appendices".  Both have good material, but start with the Body.  Projects are listed in charts and shown on maps.  

It would be best if testimony is written and sent to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting.  

Train Day in Tigard

Actually, it's not about trains per se, it's about High-Capacity Transit options in Tigard.  A group of Tigard citizens want the public to vote on whether or not they want a HCT system running through their city.  The HCT could be either Bus Rapid Transit or Light Rail.

The debate on this issue has been raging for quite awhile and some prominent locals and local and regional corporations and unions have lobbied against it.

Today is the day everyone will see which side won.  It would be nice to know what the voters were thinking when they cast their votes.  Did Tigard ever do a survey of its citizens to gauge their willingness to have a HCT line in their city, or the development that comes with it?

It's not business as usual anymore - citizens want more of a say in how their city grows and functions in order to maintain the quality of life (or livability) they desire.

Go Tigard!  

Whichever way the vote turns out, I hope that Lake Oswego will retain its independence to choose its own path into the future.

It's our city after all.  

Correction, explanation and apology

CORRECTION:  

It's never pleasant to admit to one's mistakes.  But public mistakes require a public apology.  

USC was incorrect in interpretating the code amendments in a previous blog.  I apologize for the mistake and the assumption of any unprofessionalism by city staff.   

It is also a good time to clarify that I respect all our public servants and understand that they have difficult jobs that are not made easier having to deal with conflicting messages from many sources. My criticism is directed at certain ideas and philosophies of land use and planning that are currently in vogue.  

It's common these days to hear of people who wake up one day to find that something is going on in their town that makes it feel like a foreign place. If they had only known that their city government had changed direction, they would have done something. But the plans that created the transformation were in the works years before, and it would have taken dozens of people working full time to keep up with all that was going on.  People have to trust that their local government is working on their behalf, not in pursuit of an ideological belief or outside influences.  

The city is at a crossroads.  Should we go forward in a low-growth, slow-growth mode, or plan for a high-density, vibrant and connected urban future?  

This fight isn't personal and it isn't about any single person.  So again, my apologies when I get things wrong.  If I do offend, I hope it is because you don't agree with me.  Leave me a comment so we can discuss it, and allow me to change my mind, or vise versa. 

Oh those Wisconsinites!

Spring rains, or beer?  In Wisconsin, it doesn't rain much this time of year.

Iditarod? Ha! These Guys Race Bar Stools on Skis

Brothers Dominate a Sport That Put Tiny Drummond, Wis., on Map

By JESSE NEWMAN, WALL STREET JOURNAL

Updated March 4, 2014 10:34 p.m. ET

There are strict rules in bar-stool racing: Sleds must consist of two skis and one bar stool.
Read the article at The WSJ 
Jesse Newman/The Wall Street Journal

Tool kits to make or unmake a city

A blueprint for how to transform a neighborhood into a station community.  The LO Planning Commission has been hearing about code changes for months now and will hear about more on Monday, March 10.  Check the agenda attachments for the PC meeting and track all upcoming code changes carefully.

Tigard Triangle: Existing Conditions 

GREAT PLACES  Click to see illustrated suggestions to  fundamentally transform a low-density, suburban lifestyle into an urban one.  
SWCorridor Plan
Steering committee recommendation | Attachment B
Regulatory framework and financial incentives toolkit

July 22, 2013 

Toolkit: Regulatory framework that sets the stage 

This toolkit describes key transit supportive policies and regulatory tools and offers some possible examples of their application in the Southwest corridor. Information is included to illustrate
how the changes can raise the development potential within the corridor. Described in more
detail below, the policies that are recommended for further action by local partners include the following:

• zoning code changes
• examining density maximums and building height          
•  non-compliant use provision  
• stepbacks
• commercial corridor assessment 
• parking requirements and parking management 
• trip generation reductions
• responsive parking ratio
• shared parking 
• unbundling parking 
• design code changes
• layered landscapes and active open space 
• ground floor active use provisions. 

ZONING CODE  Non-conforming use provision
WHAT
In downtowns, main streets and mixed-use corridors, a non-conforming use provision can attract redevelopment on a smaller, site-specific scale. These code provisions allow a property with an existing auto-oriented use that would no longer be permitted in a zone to be continued if the property is redeveloped in exchange for increased density, a greater mix of uses, and higher design standards. This increased flexibility in a code can affect a developer’s decision to approach a specific site. In many cases, the redevelopment and design of the site may turn out to be even more important than the allowed uses.
WHY
Auto-oriented land use areas along the corridor may find this code change helpful to incent local redevelopment projects that would otherwise be limited in scope.
HOW
A local jurisdiction would examine their development code and determine the best locations to apply a non-conforming use provision. The policy could be targeted in areas where the city wishes to see redevelopment occur. This approach can be implemented in base zones, plan districts or overlay zones. 

Another estate fights for its rights

Even one instance of bureaucratic abuse is too much, but a pattern of regulations run amok have robbed families of their life estates.  Another family is now in jeopardy of losing their fortunes to a public policy that covets private land and demands that it be preserved at the owners' expense.

The Sensitive Lands regulations have been tabled as part of the Comprehensive Plan until the Council examines them in detail. Until then, the Council ruled that there would be no new sensitive lands added, and there would be no new mapping of sensitive lands.  Click here for map of SE Quadrant.

At the City Council meeting on March 4, Bob Thompson, of the Lake Oswego Stewards, told the Council of a family that is dealing with the Planning Dept. over an enlarged Sensitive Lands boundary that went from a tiny corner of the property to cover 80% of the 1.55 acres.  Upon the patriarch's death, the family is now facing the devaluation of the property that is their inheritance.  

Watch the video clip of the council meeting to get the full story.  Open up the Interactive Agenda and click on the agenda item you are interested in:
No. 7 Citizen Comment.

What would you do if this were your property and your family?

Does anyone wonder why people tend to cut valuable trees down on their property in advance of tightening regulations?  It isn't because they hate trees, it's because they know that government will be involved in their PRIVATE property.

The injustice cuts deeper when there is no scientific criteria for what animals the tree grove habitats are for and what the habitats should be like to justify the regulation (taking).  What are we doing with someone else's land?

If the public wants to control land, it ought to be willing to purchase the land.  Just like everyone else.

Connecting dots - SW Corridor Plan includes LO

A must-read website for a look at the future as designed by Metro - with the assist of local representatives on the SWCP Steering Committee.  I bet no one in the general public ever heard of the SW Corridor Plan and that despite what any LO rep. said, community buy-in is non-existent.

Southwest Corridor Plan 
SHARED INVESTMENT STRATEGY RECOMMENDATION 

The Southwest Corridor Land Use Vision – a community
vision for places throughout the corridor 

Each city in the Southwest corridor began this collaborative effort by looking at its downtown, main streets, corridors and employment areas to define a vision for these places that reflects their

unique characteristics and local aspirations. The area contains a wealth of opportunities for jobs and stable neighborhoods and is expected to grow significantly in the future. The corridor includes important regional retail and employment destinations as well as many major trails and one of the nation’s few urban national wildlife refuges.
Population and employment projections are based on Metro's growth estimates and have been distributed to cities based on their population allocations.  It would be nice if job growth could be predicted and that these would be full-time, family-wage jobs. 

            Households      Jobs

2010    78,800               187,900
2035    111,900              259,200 
For built-out cities like Lake Oswego, the only way to accommodate more growth is to increase the density of low density zones or change the uses within zones through code changes.  LO code changes are being crafted now.  

The Southwest Corridor Land Use Vision compiles local land use plans and puts them into a common language, creating a foundation for the many projects (ranging from transportation to parks) to be categorized and prioritized based on how well they support the shared corridor land use vision.

• Mixed use The corridor includes opportunities for areas with a mix of housing, employment and services in a walkable environment. Good access to transit with high quality pedestrian and bike facilities are critical elements for these mixed use areas to help leverage infill and redevelopment.
  
• Higher intensity residential Infill and redevelopment is likely to be the primary generator for new development in the corridor. The majority of new residential development that does occur will be found in the mixed-use areas, and these areas will need to integrate natural features into development to ensure a high quality of life and connections to nature. 

To develop the land use vision, each city identified key places and categorized them based on the importance of a high capacity transit investment to connect them (see map pg. 7). These key places were used to draw the draft high capacity transit alternatives, thus ensuring that the transportation solution supports the community’s vision for growth. The prioritized key places also help focus investments for other types of transportation as well as parks and natural resources. 

Recommendation: Shared investment strategy

The Southwest Corridor Plan and Shared Investment Strategy includes a strategic project list for transit, roadway, active transportation and parks and natural resources as well as ideas for policy change and development strategies. The Southwest Corridor Plan evaluation, project partner priorities and public input provided the foundation for the Southwest Corridor Shared Investment Strategy. 

Achieving desired development: Regulatory environment and financial incentivesNatural areas

The public sector plays a key role in realizing a community’s land use vision. Often, the development forms desired by communities are limited by the regulatory environment or not financially feasible.  Two important tools can help the public sector set the stage for
development consistent with community goals. Those tools are 1) changing the regulatory framework and 2) providing financial incentives. Together, these actions can catalyze market value and stimulate private investment. 

Here's how it works:

1.  Metro creates a Plan with the help of a few key people in each community.  Metro planners do the planning with help from consultants.  There are usually a few open houses for the public.   This is public input.  

2.  Local communities are encouraged by Metro to do planning for new land uses by offering grants for the planning work. The same consultants might work with multiple communities on similar plans for each.

3.  New land use designations are codified in a comprehensive plan.  Metro's plans are useless unless backed up by a city's own plans and policies.  Metro cannot act - only its "partners" can do that.

4.  New development codes support the new vision for the new land uses - typically high-density, mixed-use.

5.  Local jurisdictions create funding mechanisms for achieving elements of the plan - streets, paths, bikeways, parks, transit, and subsidies for preferred types of development.

CHECK MAPS on pages 3 and 7 to see where Lake Oswego connects with the SW Corridor .

Gentrification by Government

Portland African American Leadership Forum tries to find voice, place, amid Trader Joe's controversy
The Oregonian, February 7-8, 2014
By Andrew Theen

The first that many people had heard of the Portland African American Leadership Forum was its scathing letter to the media and PDC in December, accusing the urban renewal agency of perpetuating gentrification in what used to be majority black neighborhoods. The group demanded the $8 million Trader Joe's project be halted or reconstituted with the addition of affordable housing

The leadership academy was deep in the weeds by October, when PAALF members toured North Williams Avenue with Mayor Charlie Hales and Patrick Quinton, executive director of the development commission, to take stock of the rapid changes there.

The city's deal to sell land for Trader Joe's to Majestic Realty at a discount became public just a few weeks later. PAALF felt jilted.

=====================================================

I am posting this article because, although there are multiple issues involved here, it has some good lessons for Lake Oswego.

Public Subsidies:
With public subsidies, the government picks the winners and losers - which development gets the best breaks, who gets the facade grant. Subsidies manipulate the free market so success is not determined by an individual's own effort.  It's called Crony Capitalism.
Competition:
It puts an unfair burden on existing businesses and local competitors when a new development brings in big-name shops to their new developments in choice locations.  The new developments do not have to make ends meet in a conventional way as they have had artificial public subsidies to fall back on.
Increase in Land Values:
When LORA declares an area "blighted" or the land "underused" (by its standards), it becomes an Urban Renewal Area.  No public vote is needed to add to public debt to entice developers to come and build in our town.  So the land values go up in the URA as intended.  But the payback on the debt (including interest) doesn't reach the break even point for years while the costs for public services go up every year.
Gentrification:
When land values go up, so do rents, mortgages, and any new construction.  Property owners in the URA might benefit from the increased values, but small businesses renters may find it impossible to stay in town. As the gentrification continues, housing too goes up in cost.
Housing:
The typical response by government to "equity" issues in housing is to build new "affordable housing" at $200,000 or more per unit.  This practice is immoral means more competition with existing businesses that provide housing (apartments that pay taxes) and the large amount of money spent building new units means helping only a few people and others are left out.  And the people who are struggling with affordability now will pay more for everything including higher property taxes to benefit developers and the poor in the most expensive and egregious ways.

Solutions:
Gentrification does hurt people who cannot keep up with rising costs in an area and that has always been the case when less expensive areas look ripe for homes or new development.  Government has no responsibility for providing substitute housing for those in areas that are increasing in value (exception is Section 8 vouchers). But many times the problems are caused by government.  This situation can be stopped or radically reduced by limited, targeted investments - a  new definition for "blight" - and neighborhood and public buy-in.  What is lacking is communication with existing neighborhoods so (all) new development can fit the fabric of the existing neighborhood, and the public that may be asked to subsidize a development can vote on it.  Or have the government get out of the real estate business altogether.  They aren't good at it anyway.

ODOT pulls plug on CRC

Columbia River Crossing: ODOT to pull plug, bridge project is dead
The Oregonian, March 7, 2014
By Jeff Manning

Better get used to the current I-5 Columbia River drawbridge. The proposed new Columbia River Crossing died a quiet death in Salem Friday when the Oregon Legislature took no action to keep it going. (AP Photo/The Columbian)

Excerpts:
The Oregon Legislature, through its inaction, has put the final stake in the heart of the Columbia River Crossing.

The Oregon Department of Transportation announced Friday it is closing the I-5 bridge project's offices, issuing cease-work orders to its many contractors and shutting the project down entirely by May 31.

The end comes after more than a decade of work and nearly $190 million worth of planning, engineering, financial and traffic forecasting and other work.


In the end, boosters failed to convince skeptics that the project would adequately address the crossing's chronic congestion, or that they could pull off the project without disastrous cost overruns and other problems.
                                                                  *  *  *  *  *  * 

It appears people are seeing through the claims made by transit supporters and their attempts to make this plan happen no matter what the faults in the design, or objections of the public.  There's a reason they say "Follow the money"  -- the federal money promised for the project was just too much for Oregon politicians and lobbyists to give up, but without the Washington legislature on board, it was just not going to happen.  There are better ideas out there, but it will take some time before the public trusts that government knows how to do things simply and economically.   

Art for Everyone

The Arts Council of Lake Oswego is conducting their annual citizen vote for a sculpture to purchase for their Gallery Without Walls - an outdoor collection of sculptures spread throughout the city, available to all citizens.  To see the artwork and vote for your favorite, visit the Council's website for instructions on how to vote and where to find each piece.  Be sure to click on the brochure for the 2014 art walking tour in the left-hand menu.  We should have some nice weather ...... eventually.  Right?

 The Arts Council of Lake Oswego, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, was created in 1999 to ensure the arts will continue to be an integral part of life in our community. The Arts Council was initiated by members of The Lake Oswego Arts Commission, a City Commission, to promote philanthropic support of the arts in the City. Organizational goals include:

• Develop philanthropic funding and methods of distribution that will benefit locals arts programs, expand civic arts acquisitions, and further community arts exhibitions.
• Advance arts education as a means to promote lifelong enjoyment of the arts for all citizens of Lake Oswego.
• Work to raise the level of appreciation and understanding of all arts forms by people of all ages.
• Increase opportunities for participation in the performing, visual and literary arts.
• Promote the placement and preservation of public art in Lake Oswego.
• Convoke advocates of the many arts and support their endeavors.

2014 People's Choice Ballot

See this year's five choices, then select the sculpture you'd like to see become a part of Lake Oswego's permanent collection. You may vote once and must live or work in Lake Oswego for your vote to count. Deadline for voting is April 14, 2014 at 5 pm. We'll announce the People's Choice winner after all votes from all sources have been counted.

43% vs 11%

The Portland Tribune's Tuesday, March 4  front page article was on the differences between the attitudes and beliefs of Portlanders vs the rest of the region and the rest of the state.  If you ever felt  at odds with Portland's fast-moving trends and youthful, urban political philosophies, you have good reason to be.  It makes one question, who speaks for the rest of us?  Use the link above to read the entire article.

How liberal is Portland? 

This ain't 'Portlandia' but it sure feels like it, according to a survey highlighting the Rose City's very lefty political leanings.

Excerpts:

Everyone knows Portland is more liberal than the rest of the region and the state. People joke that a Republican can't be elected dog catcher in Portland, and that business support is the kiss of death for any politician in the city.

Conventional wisdom holds that the only conservatives live in far east Portland, and they are vastly outnumbered by everybody else in town.

Guess what? It's not a myth.

A major statewide poll conducted last year, the 2013 Oregon Values and Beliefs Survey, shows that most Portlanders are vastly more liberal than people living in the rest of the tri-county region and Oregon. Differences are dramatic on issues ranging from the economy to the environment and the proper size and role of government.

Turns out IFC’s “Portlandia” TV series is more documentary than comedy.

Results from the 2013 Oregon Values and Beliefs Survey have been presented publicly before, including at a Portland City Council work session. But the Portland Tribune asked the Davis Hibbitts and Midghall Research firm to run the numbers again, this time separating Portland from the rest of the region and the state. Those results show just how large the gap has grown between Portland and its suburbs, as well as the rest of the state.

An obvious example from the poll: far more Portlanders describe themselves as liberals on both social and economic issues.

According to the poll, a statistically astonishing 43 percent of city residents consider themselves to be “very liberal” on social issues, compared to just 11 percent of the rest of the region and 13 percent of the rest of the state.  Another 31 percent of Portlanders consider themselves to be “somewhat liberal” on social issues, compared with 24 percent of the rest of the region and 23 percent of the rest of the state.

In other words, a substantial majority of Portlanders — 74 percent — consider themselves to be liberal on social issues, compared with 35 percent of the rest of the region and 36 percent of the rest of the state.

The breakdown on economic issues is even more dramatic. Although just 19 percent of Portlanders consider themselves very liberal on economic issues, that's far more than the 6 percent in the rest of the region and state. A larger 35 percent of Portlanders consider themselves somewhat liberal on economic issues, compared with 22 percent in the rest of the region and 19 percent in the rest of the state.

Really a Red State?

Still, in delving into the statistics, it becomes apparent that without Portland in the mix, the suburbs and the rest of Oregon would be a red state, not blue.

For example, when Portland is included, 41 percent of the state is liberal on social issues. When Portland is excluded, the number falls to just 23 percent.

The same thing happens on many issues covered in the poll. When Portland is excluded, support drops for government programs, sometimes dramatically, in the region and state.

How green is my city?

I saw this item on the City Council Digest:

LIBRARY

Environmental Book Group. The group met this week to discuss the outstanding title Countdown: Our Last Best Hope for a Future on Earth? by Alan Weisman. The group has agreed that this is the best book on this topic that we have read. After 6 years or so reading and discussing all manner of nonfiction and fiction books related to the environment, the group has expanded its scope to include all nonfiction books beginning in March. Members will discuss any nonfiction book he/she may have read over the past month. The group will meet next month, February 26 where we will discuss the works of William Stafford as part of Lake Oswego Reads. The group is open to new members. For more information about the group and extensive reading lists, please visit our book group webpage at: http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/library/environmental‐book‐group‐0 

* * * * * * * *

There are several categories of environmental topics listed on the page and a cornucopia of book titles to peruse within them.  There's just one thing though - there doesn't seem to be a variety of opinions, ideology and scientific thought in this collection.  It doesn't take a leap of the imagination to see where current political ideas come from. It's as if the issue of climate change was carved in stone and there was no new scientific thought to add to the subject. It might be nice to attend the meetings to get a feel for how this group thinks and feels about the subjects they tackle.  

* * * * * * * *

Our next meeting will be…Wed. Feb. 26, 7:00-8:30 pm.

Agenda
Discussion:

Poetry of William Stafford

About

Please join us to discuss environmental books and related topics.  Typically the group meets every 4th Wednesday from 7:00-8:30 p.m. in the Library’s conference room. Keep an eye on this webpage for any changes.

For more information contact Jane Carr, Library Manager, at 503-534-5665 orjcarr@ci.oswego.or.us

TSP Agenda for Thursday, March 6

The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) has a meeting on Thursday, March 6.  The Agenda is now posted on the city website.   I was told by city engineering staff last week that the Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) would be discussed at this meeting.  At the bottom of the page, item #7 is where the Draft TSP Review occurs.  Citizen Comments are item #5, at the beginning of the meeting.  To read the Draft TSP, go to the TSP Update webpage and click on the zipped file at the bottom.

7. AGENDA 
   Transportation Advisory Board Meeting 
   Thursday, March 6, 2014
   6:00 pm

   City Council Chambers

   For Information Phone (503) 697-7419

   
   

   
   

   The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request accommodations, please contact the Traffic Engineering at 503.635.0270, 48 hours before the meeting.

   1. CALL TO ORDER
      
      
   2. ROLL CALL
      
      
   3. CONSENT AGENDA
      The items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be adopted in one motion unless a Board member or person in the audience requests, before the vote on the motions, to have the item considered separately. If removed, the Chair will indicate when the item will be discussed.
      December Meeting Minutes Approval
      
      
   4. OTHER BUSINESS
            - Welcome Council Liaison Karen Bowerman
      
      
   5. CITIZEN COMMENT
      
      
   6. STAFF REPORT (15 minutes)
      

   1. 6.1  Lake Oswego Assistant City Engineer’s Report
             Conflicting CIP Projects Map
                By Erica Rooney, P.E., Assistant City Engineer (5 minutes)
      
      
   2. 6.2  Lake Oswego Traffic Engineer’s Report 
             Oregon Passenger Rail Update
             Climate Smart Communities Update
               By Amanda Owings, P.E., Traffic Engineer (5 minutes)
      
      
   3. 6.3  Lake Oswego Traffic Engineering Report
             Traffic Control Conflict/Congestion Update
             TAB position Interviews
                By Nancy Flye, Traffic Engineering Technician III (5 minutes)
      
      
   4. 6.4  Lake Oswego Police Department Report 
                By Lt. Doug Treat
      
      

   7. BOARD DISCUSSION / ANNOUCEMENTS / REPORTS
             2014 Boards and Council Meeting Follow-up – Tom Fahey/Heather Peck 
             Draft TSP Review – Amanda Owings
      
   8. ADJOURMENT (Sic)
             Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 
      
      
      Tom Fahey, Chair | Heather Peck, Vice Chair | Peter Goodkin, Board Member | Donald McHarness, Board Member |  

       David Jorling, Board Member | Detlef Curtis, Board Member | Matthew Keenen,Board Member | 

      Sophia Intraversato, Youth Member 

URGENT - Correction on PC Meeting agenda

The Planning Commission meeting agenda for March 10, does not include a hearing about the TSP as I was told, but has instead, important code amendments that are listed as "housekeeping."   Keep watching the PC meeting notice web page for further changes to the document list or content, and for possible agenda changes.

I urge all readers to review the PC Memo and let your City Council and the Commission for Public Involvement (the Planning Commission) know if you have any problems with how this information is being handled.   There is another HUGE problem with these supposedly minor "housekeeping" issues - there are no actual existing and proposed code wording that accompanies the summary chart. The vague descriptions are not enough to tell exactly what Staff is talking about.  Guesses are not enough.

Read the previous blog entry about the PC Meeting for more information on this topic.
 

This is what is done when you aren't looking

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance.

And a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm 

themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government 

without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but

a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both.”

James Madison (1822)  

At the Planning Commission on Monday, March 10 is a Study Session on code amendments that are generally called "housekeeping".  These are supposed to be minor alterations that clean up redundancies, make code more clear and understandable, and make other minor revisions.

Buried within the generic-sounding agenda item (see below), are code revisions that are not just "housekeeping" but may have a significant impact on people's property, commercial development and city processes.  What may be minor to one person may be life-altering to another.  All CDC issues need to be given the same amount of respect and due process.  The questions here are:  1) does the meeting notice (agenda) adequately explain the scope of the issues to be studied, 2) were the parties impacted by the code amendments notified about the meeting and the amendment process, and  3) is there a better way to inform and involve citizens in the process of writing and amending codes (other than more Citizen Advisory Committees)?  NO.  NO.  YES.

State law requires that meeting notices contain enough information on topics for the average person to be able to discern what will be discussed.  Further, there are many "more important issues" to be discussed than are (vaguely) listed on the agenda.  Who decides what is "important?"  Staff or Interested Parties?

    The Public Meetings Law requires that the notice of any meeting “include a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be considered at the meeting.” ORS 192.640(1). This list should be specific enough to permit members of the public to recognize the matters in which they are interested. This requirement ordinarily would be met by dissemination of an agenda. The agenda need not go into detail about subjects scheduled for discussion or action, but it should be sufficiently descriptive so that interested persons will get an accurate picture of the agenda topics. For example, “public works contract” probably is not a sufficient description when the governing body intends to let a contract for demolition of a landmark building.

    The Public Meetings Law does not require that every proposed item of business be described in the notice. The law requires a reasonable effort to inform the public and interested persons, including news media, of the nature of the more important issues (“principal subjects”) coming before the body.  Attorney General's Public Records and Public Meetings Manual

                                                                                  * * * * * * *

From the Planning Commission's Agenda for their meeting on Monday, March 10:

8. WORK SESSION
8.1 Community Development Code Annual Housekeeping Amendments (LU 14‐0014)
Review proposed amendments to the Community Development Code (Chapter 50) to clarify and remove redundancies and add a definition to the Tree Code (Chapter 55). The proposed amendments are intended to make the code requirements more clear. Staff coordinator is Leslie Hamilton, Senior Planner. 

*

From the Planning Commission's Agenda Packet Part 2: Item 8.1 Staff Memo Re-Annual CDC Amendments

On March 10, 2014, the Planning Commission will conduct a work session for proposed amendments to the Community Development Code (Chapter 50).  These amendments include 57 items from three primary sources: *  Items identified by staff through use and application of the Code (49) *   Items identified in Phase 1 of the Code Re‐Organization project (1) *   Items identified since April 2012 that address inadvertent changes by the Code Re‐       organization (5) *   Items identified by the Community (1)

* * * * * * * Up Sucker Creek has a personal issue with a proposed land use item that may be affected by these "housekeeping" amendments.  A proposed path (that is functionally useless) lies on or next to private property that this publicly-minded reporter has in interest in.  I have spoken in public forums (Planning Commission, City Council, various Open Houses, etc.) and to the planning and engineering staff that the path designation should be removed.  A public path does not belong on private land, especially on or abutting residential uses, and never without all affected property owners' approval .

CORRECTION:  

USC was incorrect in interpretation of the code on paths.  I apologize for the mistake and the assumption of unprofessional behavior by city staff.   

The advancement and diffusion of knowledge 

is the only guardian of true liberty.

  

James Madison

Streetcar lobbyists driven by federal money

NO EVIDENCE that STREETCARS REVITALIZE neighborhoods and lead to BILLIONS of dollars of economic DEVELOPMENT........UNLESS redevelopment was supported by HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars in public SUBSIDIES!  And LOBBYISTS work the locals to get FEDERAL money into CONTRACTORS' and DEVELOPERS' hands at our EXPENSE.  

Crony Capitalism.

Streetcar Lobbyists

The Antiplanner, February 18, 2014

Lobbying for streetcars has become a “rare growth spot in an otherwise difficult business environment,” reports Politico. At least thirteen different lobbying firms are trying to help cities get federal money for building clunky, obsolete rail systems.

The article repeats the usual drivel about how streetcars revitalize neighborhoods and lead to billions of dollars of economic development. Since there’s absolutely no evidence of that outside of Portland, and the only redevelopment along Portland streetcar lines was supported by hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies, all the Antiplanner can say is that a lot of cities are going to be surprised when nothing happens where they build streetcars unless they sneak in their own subsidies to developers.

Patton Boggs worked with Portland to secure the first modern federal streetcar grant. | AP Photo

Lobbyists ride the streetcar wave 

PoliticoPro

By BYRON TAU and ANDREA DRUSCH | 2/12/14 

Streetcars are all the rage in urban planning circles. And K Street has taken notice.

A renaissance for the vintage mass-transit option has spawned a new niche area for lobbying — a rare growth spot in an otherwise difficult business environment. Driven by the hunt for federal transportation dollars, a handful of downtown firms is seeing an influx of municipalities, states or private development organizations lobbying for grants and transit projects.

Patton Boggs worked with Portland, Ore., to secure the first modern federal grant for a streetcar system in 2009. That system, which opened in 2001 and later expanded with federal assistance, helped spark a renewed nationwide interest in streetcars, which also got a boost when the Obama administration tweaked its transportation funding criteria to advance “livability” and transit-oriented development.

Streetcars were commonplace in cities large and small until the mid-20th century, when most were replaced by bus lines. But since President Barack Obama took office in 2009, his administration has made a concerted effort to fund rail — both the kind of high-speed intercity rail that has attracted derision and controversy as well as local streetcar, light-rail and subway projects.

The Center for Transportation Excellence’s Jason Jordan said the administration’s “clear prioritization” is helping drive the streetcar boom.

The pro-streetcar forces on K Street also have their own coalition. The Community Streetcar Coalition was formed in 2004, when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) made a legislative effort to get more federal money for streetcars. The coalition represents cities, streetcar makers and transit agencies, among other interests.

“This is definitely a growth area,” said Jeff Boothe, an attorney for Holland & Knight who serves as the executive director of the coalition.  “Cities see the streetcars as a way to organize and shape land use and economic development,” Boothe said. “They see them as in part revalidating their communities.”

But not everyone is a fan of the increased investment in transit that the streetcar boom has unleashed.

Adrian Moore, vice president of policy at the libertarian Reason Foundation and a former member of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, says special interests have driven the growth in streetcars.

“I’ve always thought its ludicrous that the federal government ever got into funding urban transit projects,” Moore said. “You simply cannot argue that having better public transit in Austin benefits me in California and therefore there’s a national interest and we should tax payers from the vast part of the country that does not have transit pay for public transit for the people who happen to live in bigger cities. There is no national interest there. It’s strictly the result of lobbying.”

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

Where do these ideas come from?  Why are citizens always the last to know about them?  

Unless one is making money from them, maybe we're not supposed to konw.