For not being a "politician," Mayor Potter sure seems intent on playing politics with this proposal and on continuing to lie about how the money can be spent.

It's really a shame.

Wasn't he the deciding vote in killing Safe, Sound and Green. Oh, I'm sorry, I meant putting it to a public vote, where I'm sure it'll be a landslide.

Ugh.

You should post the crash list as something like a pdf. An examination of the pedestrian crash list shows why the transportation department wants to build the Couch-Burnside couplet: to reduce those nasty deer in the headlights car-pedestrian crashes. Savvy readers might conclude we need an 82nd Avenue couplet too! That could make for a pretty nifty new Chinatown.

How could the Flanders site appear on the list of the most dangerous intersections if it isn't currently an intersection?

Aaaaaand, now that I've actually looked at the crash list... all those crashes along Burnside and Couch? The idea of the Flanders bridge is to create a safe east-west corridor for non-auto traffic so those are diminished.

Is it just me, or is Potter just trying to set up (what he thinks will be) a spike for Sho Dozono?

Ok, at the risk of being torn apart, I've decided to go out on a limb and question the Mercury's relentless support of Sam Adam's latest pet project. Doesn't this paper's readership consist mostly of wage slaves and hipsters, all of whom are having a hard time keeping up with Portland's perpetually rising utility rates, cost of living increases and might even be getting tired of city officials dumping money and time into goofy stuff like this? Amy, if I'm not mistaken, didn't you move down here from Seattle because of this sort of thing? Are you looking for an excuse to move to Medford or something?

I'd accuse Mr. Adams of not giving a damn about Portland's working class, given his Safe, Sound and Give-Me-More-Money-So-I-Can-Spend-It-On-Couplets proposal, but I'm sure he could put a positive spin on the whole thing for us little people. After all, once the bridge is in place, we'll all be able to ride our bikes to our $8.50 an hour jobs busing tables in the Pearl District without fear of getting hit by cars! Hooray for the widening gap between the city's upper and lower classes! This new bike bridge is sure to ease the transportation woes of service industry drones heading off to work in the Pearl District's bistros, yoga studios and doggy daycare centers. Everybody wins! More cheap labor for the rich, easier commutes for the poor.

I'm no fan of Sho but the mayor's race is shaping up to be another Potter/Francesconi battle; a good-hearted but inept candidate vs. a guy this city can't afford to elect. If Adams becomes mayor, I guess I'll just have to get used to the idea of commuting to work downtown (via bike, of course) from Aloha.

Welcome to the new Portland, the American city that combines the best aspects of green living and sustainability with the tenants of feudalism. Thanks Sam and thank you guys for egging him on.

A.) Safe, Sound, and Green Streets doesn't pay anything into the couplet, with the tangential exception that some of the funding for the Flanders bridge is part of that package, and the Flanders bridge is vital to the Flanders bike boulevard, which was originally a negotiated aspect of the couplet.

B.) Given that there will always be service industry jobs in the Pearl and NW, so long as it is a successful retail district, would you rather the non-auto transportation options be extremely dangerous? (Would you rather those jobs didn't exist at all? And would you rather the workers all have to drive instead because it's safer, which would require more parking, more freeways, and higher costs to workers?)

C.) People who flee to the suburbs to escape "rising housing costs" in Portland should be finding that the costs there aren't much cheaper, and they're going to spend far more in gas to commute than they'd be saving by moving. And none of that has to do with the Flanders bridge, which is funded by dedicated sources that can't really be used on much else.

Amy,

The only intellectual dishonesty present here is coming from you. Some of the money can be spent elsewhere. I don't know if you're having trouble with the math, or if you just believe everything Adams is feeding to you. Try out some critical thinking here. In fact, that might be a good idea for anyone who supports this idea.

Marcus Brody: Obviously the intersection at Flanders is intended. And just because providing the data is the mayor sticking his tongue out at Adams doesn't mean it's wrong. Seriously Amy, you sound like Johnnie Cochran using the Wookie defense when you say that since the intersection is not dangerous, that justifies the need for the bridge. You'd make a skilled politician yourself, and I don't mean that as a compliment. Are you vying for a spot on Adams' staff?

Adams projects himself as the victim in everything, and it's complete bulls__t. The sad truth is that Adams will probably be the next mayor, and we'll be the suckers.

It is beginning to sound like Karl Rove might be behind this anyone but Sam, root of all evil, can do no good movement.

It is beginning to sound like Karl Rove might be behind this movement to associate Karl Rove with any comment that voices reasonable doubt for Sam.

Aloha can fuck off. Whining, pissy suburbanite clones. "Boohoo, why won't someone address MY needs since I commute 30 miles each way to work in my Yukon :*( :*( :*(". Stingy, myopic motherfuckers.

What kind of dumb douchebag equates a pedestrian bridge (ostensibly) for the service industry with a widening class divide with a straight face? I'd say the logic was tortured if there was the slightest hint of the application of logic.

I like this invasion of the Merc by the Trib's readership though. I predict a 500% increase in the usage of "boondoggle" over the next few weeks.

I live on Irving and walk and bike that way daily.

For those who need to cross Flanders, it's an easy matter to walk/bike up to Everett or Glisan and take the bridges there. Or go to Johnson, which runs under the freeway.

Why do we need a new bridge in the first place when striping the existing roads or putting in pedestrian/bike guard rails would accomplish the same thing? It would be cheaper and greener.

Daaaaave: Thanks for the snark and for missing the point. I don't live in Aloha, have no desire to live in Aloha and certainly don't want to become one of those 60-mile round trip commuters. Sam's policies may make that happen though. Does this bike bridge help widen the class divide? Yup, it sure does. That's my argument and I'm sticking to it. If you doubt it, consider all the working class neighborhoods where that money could be better spent. Why is it that the Pearl District gets all of this supposed "nope, sorry guys. We really can't spend this money anywhere else" cash? City Council makes the rules. They can spend this money wherever they want. There always seems to be money for streetcars, armory theaters and goofy bike bridges in the Pearl but to fill potholes on my street? "Gosh, we're gonna need to raise taxes for that!" Puh-leaze. While Sam attempts to build a paradise in NW the rest of the city's infrastructure is rotting. Also, for what it's worth, I don't read the Tribune.

Marcus:

A: I hope you're right about that but the cynic in me assumes some of those funds will quickly be diverted to streetcar-type projects and that fuzzy math and loopholes will make it happen.

B: Of course not but I still question the necessity of this bike bridge. Are there really that many people biking through the Pearl and getting hit by cars to warrant putting this project ahead of ye olde basic services?

C: We could do the math on this but if your job requires you to commute by car, for whatever reason, the suburbs are still going to be cheaper than living in PDX.

Variable: Thanks for presenting a better argument than I can.

"Not Jack Bog"

It's far more complicated than that.

Urban Renewal Areas, especially since Measure 5 & 50, really only work in areas where you can create a significant number of new units--thus generating the property tax revenue that creates the TIF dollars you need to make infrastructure investments.

Witness the few dollars that Lents has created, or Gateway, or Interstate.

It is true that City Council creates the URA districts and their boundaries, but to suggest that they could just as easily do so anywhere in the city is wrong--especially given that the neighborhood densities are exactly what people are trying to protect.

As far as SDCs go--the other major source of Sauvie funding--that list is generated once every ten years by a (large, some 60 people) committee made up of folks from all over the city. The projects are diverse in what they are and where they are. You can view them at portlandonline.com/transportation. This list was approved by City Council early last year, with a vote from Mayor Potter as well.

As I understand it, though the pearl district has paid many millions in SDCs, it has received just $700,000 of it back.

In addition, the crossing at Flanders has been identified prior to Sam or Mayor Potter being in office. That's why it's so frustrating to see it turned into this macho political fight. This is about a long-identified community priority.

Does that mean that East Portland doesn't have priorities? No. But it does mean that this opportunity is here now, not in six years, not in three, and not last year--and I'd hate to lose it just because of petty politics and a dumbing down of the issue.

By the way, I live in North Portland and I can't wait for the bridge.

All these projects attributed to Adams have actually been developed after years of study by the Portland transportation department, way before Adams was involved. They look at population density, job density, freeway to local street access and the mix of cars, bikes, pedestrians, wheelchairs, buses and trains with hard measurements, statistics and mathematical models.

Glisan and Everett are very dangerous for bikes and pedestrians because both have fast drivers and 14th and 15th have very high speed off ramps from 405 as well as left and right turns on red crossing bikes and pedestrians.

A Flanders route would actually speed traffic because it won't have to wait for pedestrians in the crosswalk when turning.

The upper management in the transportation department actually came from maintenance and are always promoting maintenance and repair in addition to long term improvements.

Why should I pay a flat tax similar to the poll taxes that Thatcher pushed through in the U.K. (ask Matt Davis about *that*) just so some Pearlies can have a nice new bridge to bike from their condo to their expensive restaurants, while areas of outer Southeast and areas of Northeast don't have sidewalks or paved roads?

I fear Sam's reign will be like Vera Katz's - sweetheart deals for developers, toys for yuppies like the Tram and Streetcar, lip service to wealthier liberals while the police beat and shoot those rude black people and young people, and a refusal to acknowledge constituents east of 50th and north of Fremont.

"All these projects attributed to Adams have actually been developed after years of study by the Portland transportation department, way before Adams was involved."

Ah, that old political maneuver. Blame the politicians and bureaucrats that came before you. My favorite example of this...the Bushies attempting to pin 9/11 on the Clinton administration because they didn't go after Bin Laden in the mid-90s.

The fact of the matter is that Adams approved the bridge and it went through under his watch. Therefore, he's got to take responsibility for it. If he didn't like it, he didn't have to push for it.

The point is not that Sam isn't taking responsibility--he definitely is--if he were interested in "votes," he would have walked away long ago. The point is that it isn't HIS project, or even the bureaus--it's been a community project for a while.

Dude, they are not bureaucrats, they are nationally respected people in transportation planning who went to school for it and have devoted their entire working career to it. Planning and transportation people from Portland are respected internationally. They speak at conferences and such and can move to another city and write their own ticket for a job.

The transportation department does a ton of public meetings for each project and I'm sure they would welcome you at any of those events to weigh in.

As far as I know, it would take a huge tax increase to pave all the unpaved streets around Portland. Much more than the proposed street maintenance tax. It's not going to happen unless you want to pay about ten cents a gallon extra for gas to pave those gravel roads, probably much more if they need sewers. For what can be done with an unpaved street check NE Emerson between 28th and 29th.

Regardless of the merits of the Flanders St. overpass(I'm actually for it), the endless Sam Adams tongue-bath on this site is really over the top and strains any notion journalistic credibility it may have aspired to.
While I understand that the proposed funding for the Sauvie Island bridge project is set to come from sources that are limited in what, and where, they can be spent, that doesn't excuse those that make the rules on what can be spent and where from allocating more resources to other parts of town desperately in need of safety improvements.
It is quite odd, and certainly begs the question, why the Transportation Commissioner hasn't found a dime nor lifted a finger to provide any improvement to SE 82/Powell, far and away one of the most, if not the most, dangerous intersections in town for peds (forget about passing through on a bike).

Isn't this debate, while certainly intriguing, somewhat besides the point? By which I mean it's a debate over bridge vs. no bridge but (correct me if I'm wrong) that isn't even on the table. The only thing that's on the table is cheap new ugly bridge vs. expensive recycled prety bridge.

I kind of see it as an expensive public art and architecture project. Of course that's going to seem frivolous to some. But I've also seen plenty of cities spend a heck of a lot more to completely get rid of something like the 405 overpass. I dunno, imagine if the Fremont could have looked just like the Marquam for less money. Would that have been worth the savings?

Again "not aTrib reader" you are wrong.

Visit http://www.commissionersam.com/node/2164
and you'll see that you're wrong. It looks like Transportation spent $1.2M improving intersections, including 82nd/Powell, in East County.

I don't think the Mercury is lauding Sam, but is certainly revealing the accuracy between competing claims.

Reasonable people can disagree on whether or not we should have a pedestrian crossing at Flanders, whether or not it MIGHT be cheaper in 5-6 years to build a 15' span, or whether or not the trade-offs in additional costs are worth it given the time and saved carbon.

But it's inaccurate and disingenuous to take Mayor Potter's statements, and those similar to yours, and print them at face value.

Jeff: you really have no idea what you're talking about. Pretty amusing, actually.