This Week in the Mercury
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Politics / News Adams' Biggest Fans Upset Over 12 Lane Bridge
Posted by Matt Davis on Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Even Sam Adams' number one supporter has concerns over the mayor's decision to recommend a 12-lane bridge over the Columbia. Hollie Teal is the one who organized the Facebook group in Adams' support last month, and the rally outside city hall to urge him to stay. She ran a remarkably positive interview with Adams on her blog earlier this week. 
TEAL: Photo courtesy of Bikeportland.org
But Teal seems to have turned on Adams over his Columbia Bridge Decision, writing a post on her blog entitled "needing answers" early this morning:
I'm writing concerning yesterday's city council vote for the 12-lane CRC option— it's important that you're aware how this vote sits with your supporters. We counted on you to represent the city of Portland's sustainability priorities in this project, and we felt assured that you would fight for what you've advocated up to this point: the smallest possible bridge. Why did you change your position? The city needs you to be the mayor we elected, who will fight to continue the momentum you helped to generate of building a transportation infrastructure that does not worship at the altar of the automobile.You told me on Sunday that you love Portland and its people, but this monster bridge does not bode well for the future livability of our city. Your supporters need some definitive and focused reassurance that what you've voted for is in keeping with your sustainable agenda and that we're not selling out to large business interests.
A commenter on Teal's blog left a response, linking to Adams' website. Teal responded:
I saw that and thought: "So we're done focusing our resources to promote alternative transportation and now we're back to adding more fucking freeways?"When has adding more freeway capacity ever improved livability or decreased carbon footprint? And where does anyone mention anything about bike/ped lanes on the new CRC? Why hasn't he said anything about how miserable the current bike/ped crossing is and how a big focus for the new bridge will be on wide, safe bike/ped paths?
Reached by phone, Teal said she was feeling "a little frustrated" when she wrote the Cheney-esque expletive about freeways. I asked her what she thought of Adams' reaction, which she's also posted on her blog. "Or his non-reaction, as it were?" she joked.
"I wrote to Sam wanting a more specific addressing of sustainability issues," Teal says. "And I don't feel like he really did give it. I think he's in a tough spot. I'm pretty disappointed. I think it may not be as terrible as people think in terms of sustainability issues, but I'm disappointed."
"I'm seeing a lot of his other supporters turn on this decision," Teal continues. "A lot of supporters thought Adams was about sustainability and that he was very progressive, but we're sort of sliding down a slippery slope, here. I'm not really wanting to call him out loudly at this point, but yeah, this is very disappointing."
Jonathan Maus of Bikeportland is also reflecting on Adams' decision. "I think Sam is playing the cards he's been dealt," says Maus. "He's trying to do what Sam always does, which is trying to make the compromise work so that he can be seen in a good light on both sides. But he's given up a lot, here. And he's raised the stakes considerably on how people are going to see his sustainable progressive credentials."
Maus adds that while Adams' office may be presenting the bridge issue positively, "I think what's important is what the community is hearing, which is that he's caving to 12 lanes."
1
Ms. Teal and Mr. Maus,
I am a Portland citizen, worker and taxpayer. I support the larger bridge. Like 77% of my fellow Portlanders I commute by automobile. I think taking care of our streets and ensuring enough capacity is a laudable goal.
I'm not sure why you assume that the narrow interests of your particular groups represent the spirit of Portland, but they don't. By my estimate 5% to 6% of Portland regularly rides bikes. That's very impressive, and I hope it grows. But it's also still 5% to 6%. It's a bit childish to expect development of a new interstate bridge to be called off because Portland "bike advocates" are stomping their feet.
It's not our bridge anyway. It's a project of the states of Oregon and Washington. Grow up.
I am a Portland citizen, worker and taxpayer. I support the larger bridge. Like 77% of my fellow Portlanders I commute by automobile. I think taking care of our streets and ensuring enough capacity is a laudable goal.
I'm not sure why you assume that the narrow interests of your particular groups represent the spirit of Portland, but they don't. By my estimate 5% to 6% of Portland regularly rides bikes. That's very impressive, and I hope it grows. But it's also still 5% to 6%. It's a bit childish to expect development of a new interstate bridge to be called off because Portland "bike advocates" are stomping their feet.
It's not our bridge anyway. It's a project of the states of Oregon and Washington. Grow up.
2
I think what many people don't understand is that Sam has lost credibility and respect with some very key and important decision makers due to the way he handled himself during "the crises." This has caused him to lose clout and power politically within the role of one decision maker among many. That's a shame, but I fear that this is just the tip of the new political reality his office now faces. Whatever it is, the weaknesses are showing.
Note, I did not say "due to his affair with Breedlove." For many, Sam already has already shown times of political and policy weakness in his years on Council. A typical pattern in this is for Sam and his office to vision the biggest, newest and greatest innovations and then promise those things as "done deals" and then finally nip and tuck and pander on those promises to the point where they are mearly shells of what they started out with. So really, Portlanders that are shocked by the 12 lane decision better get used to stuff like this - there's a whole bunch more to come from his office.
Great ideas are one thing, innovative policy is another. However at the end of the day its all about effective influence and decision making and the ability to implement those ideas that matters. It's also all about not making false promises you can't keep.
That's where eroding respect and trust might come into play - not about Sam's personal life, but his professional abilities.
Note, I did not say "due to his affair with Breedlove." For many, Sam already has already shown times of political and policy weakness in his years on Council. A typical pattern in this is for Sam and his office to vision the biggest, newest and greatest innovations and then promise those things as "done deals" and then finally nip and tuck and pander on those promises to the point where they are mearly shells of what they started out with. So really, Portlanders that are shocked by the 12 lane decision better get used to stuff like this - there's a whole bunch more to come from his office.
Great ideas are one thing, innovative policy is another. However at the end of the day its all about effective influence and decision making and the ability to implement those ideas that matters. It's also all about not making false promises you can't keep.
That's where eroding respect and trust might come into play - not about Sam's personal life, but his professional abilities.
3
Does seem like Sammy decided to cave on this one without much of a fight to gain some face with the people who are still going to hate him - boy diddling or not.
4
If there's one thing I can't get enough of, it's being told to grow up because I would rather live in a city that promotes alternative transportation over single occupancy driving. Bring it on.
5
You make the mistake of assuming this is all about cycling for me. It's not. It's about not turning our city into Atlanta or LA or any other US city that is choked with traffic due to the proliferation of freeways.
If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does, then you know first-hand the effect traffic has on livability. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying that it's misery. Adding more traffic lanes isn't the solution to lessening traffic. More traffic means more noise, air and water pollution, auto accidents, lessening of property values, and a lowered quality of life. These are things that I, and other opponents of the larger CRC option, desperately want to avoid. Sam Adams has shared this priority and that's why I have supported him and will continue to do so until it becomes clear that he does not have the city's best interests in mind.
P.S. I haven't turned on Adams. I'm disappointed in the concessions he's made so far on this project, but I think it's early enough that something good could come of it. I'm willing to give him that chance.
If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does, then you know first-hand the effect traffic has on livability. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying that it's misery. Adding more traffic lanes isn't the solution to lessening traffic. More traffic means more noise, air and water pollution, auto accidents, lessening of property values, and a lowered quality of life. These are things that I, and other opponents of the larger CRC option, desperately want to avoid. Sam Adams has shared this priority and that's why I have supported him and will continue to do so until it becomes clear that he does not have the city's best interests in mind.
P.S. I haven't turned on Adams. I'm disappointed in the concessions he's made so far on this project, but I think it's early enough that something good could come of it. I'm willing to give him that chance.
6
"If there's one thing I can't get enough of, it's being told to grow up because I would rather live in a city that promotes alternative transportation over single occupancy driving."
The thing is, you were never told this. Misrepresenting those who disagree with you does nothing to further your cause, but goes a long way to making you look illiterate.
The thing is, you were never told this. Misrepresenting those who disagree with you does nothing to further your cause, but goes a long way to making you look illiterate.
7
Great politician, great man, that's Sam I Am.
He really knows how to shore up his key constituencies when the chips are down, doesn't he?
He really knows how to shore up his key constituencies when the chips are down, doesn't he?
8
ExCityEmployee, thanks for that insight. It strikes me that Sam is very wonkish, and thinks that if he studies an issue from every angle, he can come up with smart ways to make everyone happy. He wants to please everyone. I think his supporters will get wonkish leadership rather than the bold leadership they were maybe expecting. (Backtracking on the Sauvie Island bridge and street repair tax come to mind.)
Hollie, I just don't want fellow citizens trying to socially engineer me. I resent it.
Hollie, I just don't want fellow citizens trying to socially engineer me. I resent it.
9
"If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does"
Again, not what anyone said. You seem to have some cognitive problems, Hollie.
Again, not what anyone said. You seem to have some cognitive problems, Hollie.
10
"It's a bit childish to expect development of a new interstate bridge to be called off because Portland "bike advocates" are stomping their feet."
It's not about calling off a bridge altogether, it's about the size and scope of the bridge, and the fact that other reasonable alternatives were NOT considered as part of the CRC process.
8-lanes plus full shoulders, for example, would offer an effective boost in capacity of well over 33% in lane capacity alone, because of the wider lanes and shoulders, and reconfiguring the interchanges (common to all CRC proposals) adds even more capacity. 8-lanes can become 10 in the future while still retaining one shoulder in each direction and full lane widths.
There's nothing that 12-lanes is going to provide, capacity-wise, which won't cause increased bottlenecks further south... unless Portland is planning to double-deck I-5, which I don't think is going to happen anytime soon. (And to even widen I-5 by one lane on the east bank will require rebuilding dozens of interchanges, possibly even more costly than the CRC itself.)
The real problem is the lack of local arterial crossings to carry the many trips which, even CRC planners admit, are local in nature.
Imagine for a moment that the only Willamette river crossings in Portland were the Marquam and the Fremont. No Sellwood, no Ross Island, to Hawthorne, no Morrison, no Burnside, no Steel, no St. Johns. Imagine what kind of congestion you'd see on the freeway bridges as a result... it would look a lot like the worst of times on the Interstate bridges.
Well, that's what we have connecting Portland to Clark County. It's just ridiculous to cram all our trips, including all local trips, into two freeway bridges, no matter how large they are.
We need a more distributed system, including local arterial crossings.
That's just what opponents of a massive CRC project have proposed, and have been proposing for some time now.
It's not about "big bridge" vs. "no bridge", but finding a balance that serves citizens on BOTH sides of the river well.
More...
It's not about calling off a bridge altogether, it's about the size and scope of the bridge, and the fact that other reasonable alternatives were NOT considered as part of the CRC process.
8-lanes plus full shoulders, for example, would offer an effective boost in capacity of well over 33% in lane capacity alone, because of the wider lanes and shoulders, and reconfiguring the interchanges (common to all CRC proposals) adds even more capacity. 8-lanes can become 10 in the future while still retaining one shoulder in each direction and full lane widths.
There's nothing that 12-lanes is going to provide, capacity-wise, which won't cause increased bottlenecks further south... unless Portland is planning to double-deck I-5, which I don't think is going to happen anytime soon. (And to even widen I-5 by one lane on the east bank will require rebuilding dozens of interchanges, possibly even more costly than the CRC itself.)
The real problem is the lack of local arterial crossings to carry the many trips which, even CRC planners admit, are local in nature.
Imagine for a moment that the only Willamette river crossings in Portland were the Marquam and the Fremont. No Sellwood, no Ross Island, to Hawthorne, no Morrison, no Burnside, no Steel, no St. Johns. Imagine what kind of congestion you'd see on the freeway bridges as a result... it would look a lot like the worst of times on the Interstate bridges.
Well, that's what we have connecting Portland to Clark County. It's just ridiculous to cram all our trips, including all local trips, into two freeway bridges, no matter how large they are.
We need a more distributed system, including local arterial crossings.
That's just what opponents of a massive CRC project have proposed, and have been proposing for some time now.
It's not about "big bridge" vs. "no bridge", but finding a balance that serves citizens on BOTH sides of the river well.
11
NOT A CAT,
I wasn't told to grow up for caring about my "narrow interests" in the first comment? Or that it's "childish" to expect that a new infrastructure development might want to take into account alternative transportation?
Huh. Sure looks to me like I was.
I wasn't told to grow up for caring about my "narrow interests" in the first comment? Or that it's "childish" to expect that a new infrastructure development might want to take into account alternative transportation?
Huh. Sure looks to me like I was.
12
Dude, I'm not sure what you're on about. I was quoting the first comment.
Do you want to have a discussion, or do you want to pretend that I'm mentally incompetent? Up to you.
Do you want to have a discussion, or do you want to pretend that I'm mentally incompetent? Up to you.
13
"Like 77% of my fellow Portlanders I commute by automobile."
"If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does"
I'm not sure how much of a discussion you're capable of if you really can't see how these statements are not the same.
"If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does"
I'm not sure how much of a discussion you're capable of if you really can't see how these statements are not the same.
14
Bob, those are good points (I'm not being sarcastic). But wasn't there a lengthy study of various alternatives that included most of these things? I know they looked at doing a second arterial/MAX bridge.
Your point about lanes is good. If they can put 12 lanes in a skinnier format, that's fine with me. If they want to paint it for 10 lanes now, and expand later, that's fine too.
Your point about lanes is good. If they can put 12 lanes in a skinnier format, that's fine with me. If they want to paint it for 10 lanes now, and expand later, that's fine too.
16
"NOT A CAT," not only does the first comment on this very post conclude with the words "grow up," that same comment states that 77% of the populace of Portland commutes by car.
If you're going to call someone out for factual inaccuracies, you must first be sure that you are in fact correct about said inaccuracies. Or at least strive for basic literacy.
If you're going to call someone out for factual inaccuracies, you must first be sure that you are in fact correct about said inaccuracies. Or at least strive for basic literacy.
17
hey folks,
especially you, Blabby. I never told Matt Davis I was "disappointed". I have told him this and I expect him to correct the story asap.
also, I do not represent any "particular groups" or "interests". I run a website that publishes news about bikes and transportation. if you read my website you will see that we present both sides of issues.
thank you.
especially you, Blabby. I never told Matt Davis I was "disappointed". I have told him this and I expect him to correct the story asap.
also, I do not represent any "particular groups" or "interests". I run a website that publishes news about bikes and transportation. if you read my website you will see that we present both sides of issues.
thank you.
18
Awesome, sockpuppets.
smurfette/hollie: i never denied these two things. they are different, however, from what you said was said.
i'll try again, before we assume that you really must be spoken to like a 5-year-old:
"Like 77% of my fellow Portlanders I commute by automobile."
"If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does"
Not the same. Do you really not get it?
smurfette/hollie: i never denied these two things. they are different, however, from what you said was said.
i'll try again, before we assume that you really must be spoken to like a 5-year-old:
"Like 77% of my fellow Portlanders I commute by automobile."
"If you drive everywhere, as 77% of the city does"
Not the same. Do you really not get it?
19
Blabby, by living and/or working in our city you grant the community the right to "socially engineer" you or whatever you want to call it, because, hey, we're a community, and what you do affects everyone else, and that's why we have urban planning, laws, etc. If you don't want to be socially engineered, then move up to the mountains and write your manifestos from there.
20
"But wasn't there a lengthy study of various alternatives that included most of these things?"
There were a number of things which were considered "outside the study area" and were therefore summarily rejected.
For example, two genuine problems with the current bridges are the need for bridge lifts (which tie up traffic), and the fact that the "hump" in the I-5 bridges does not line up at all with the nearby railroad bridge, causing ships to have to make a risky s-curve navigation to avoid a lift.
It has been pointed out by more than one expert in the field that if the railroad bridge were rebuilt (and it probably will be someday because of passenger rail initiatives and increased freight rail traffic), it could be realigned so that the S-curve navigation is not needed, and the overwhelming majority of daytime bridge lifts would be eliminated.
That kill two birds with one stone, but the railroad bridge was not part of the study area, and therefore could _not_ be considered in any proposals.
Further, at this time, all auto trips to/from Hayden Island must use I-5.
A local arterial crossing between the Marine Drive area and Janzen Beach, combined with a local arterial crossing to Vancouver, and associated interchange and arterial improvements on both sides of the river, would eliminate many of the I-5 trips, and remove the most dangerous part of the current interchanges.
These arterial crossings could provide the means for cars, bikes, pedestrians, and MAX to access the island.
To my knowledge, new crossings of this nature were not modeled... the only bike/ped and transit modeling that has been done has been in the context of the large-format freeway bridges.
All of these things I mention are projects which are likely to be done at some point anyway, so we should at least model their impacts and see what that does for long-term projections of CRC usage needs.
If you show me modeling of all of those improvements (and interchange improvements) which says we need more than 8-10 lanes over 50 years, I'll listen. But so far it hasn't been fully examined.
Also, I don't buy into the line that this is a 100-year investment so we'd better build the biggest bridge. The fact is that it won't be one bridge anyway, but parallel bridges. If we build two 4-5 lane bridges, and we discover in 30 years that we really need 4 more lanes, we can build an additional parallel bridge... it's not like the CRC will have to be torn down to add capacity.
More...
There were a number of things which were considered "outside the study area" and were therefore summarily rejected.
For example, two genuine problems with the current bridges are the need for bridge lifts (which tie up traffic), and the fact that the "hump" in the I-5 bridges does not line up at all with the nearby railroad bridge, causing ships to have to make a risky s-curve navigation to avoid a lift.
It has been pointed out by more than one expert in the field that if the railroad bridge were rebuilt (and it probably will be someday because of passenger rail initiatives and increased freight rail traffic), it could be realigned so that the S-curve navigation is not needed, and the overwhelming majority of daytime bridge lifts would be eliminated.
That kill two birds with one stone, but the railroad bridge was not part of the study area, and therefore could _not_ be considered in any proposals.
Further, at this time, all auto trips to/from Hayden Island must use I-5.
A local arterial crossing between the Marine Drive area and Janzen Beach, combined with a local arterial crossing to Vancouver, and associated interchange and arterial improvements on both sides of the river, would eliminate many of the I-5 trips, and remove the most dangerous part of the current interchanges.
These arterial crossings could provide the means for cars, bikes, pedestrians, and MAX to access the island.
To my knowledge, new crossings of this nature were not modeled... the only bike/ped and transit modeling that has been done has been in the context of the large-format freeway bridges.
All of these things I mention are projects which are likely to be done at some point anyway, so we should at least model their impacts and see what that does for long-term projections of CRC usage needs.
If you show me modeling of all of those improvements (and interchange improvements) which says we need more than 8-10 lanes over 50 years, I'll listen. But so far it hasn't been fully examined.
Also, I don't buy into the line that this is a 100-year investment so we'd better build the biggest bridge. The fact is that it won't be one bridge anyway, but parallel bridges. If we build two 4-5 lane bridges, and we discover in 30 years that we really need 4 more lanes, we can build an additional parallel bridge... it's not like the CRC will have to be torn down to add capacity.
22
Not a Cat, call off your dogs.
Mr. Maus, I will check out your site.
Paul, in a democracy, the majority of the community does the engineering. To over-generalize from the driving statistics: we've got 25% of the population trying to wag the 75% dog. I resent it.
Go tell poor people beyond 82nd that they should bike to downtown everyday, or pay way too much for a transit pass. Tell people with kids at home to tack an extra hour or more onto their commute time in order to take alternative modes. When you advocate for eliminating parking downtown and such things to create your ecotopia, your f**king with me directly.
Mr. Maus, I will check out your site.
Paul, in a democracy, the majority of the community does the engineering. To over-generalize from the driving statistics: we've got 25% of the population trying to wag the 75% dog. I resent it.
Go tell poor people beyond 82nd that they should bike to downtown everyday, or pay way too much for a transit pass. Tell people with kids at home to tack an extra hour or more onto their commute time in order to take alternative modes. When you advocate for eliminating parking downtown and such things to create your ecotopia, your f**king with me directly.
23
My proverbial dogs are called off. I just wanted to give hollie a chance to show herself capable of discourse with adults that know how words function.
27
Blabby, a majority also gave us 8 years of Republican rule. Look where we are now, with just their lack of attention to better transit policies alone. If we spent more on transit and alternatives instead of just building more freeways for folks like you who insist on driving, those poor people out beyond 82nd wouldn't need that extra hour. Move to someplace like Houston if you want that (where I used to live). Portland wants better.
28
How about this Paul: I'm from here. Why don't you move back to Houston and socially engineer it, instead of moving here and presuming to lecture me about what Portland wants? Maybe Portland wants fewer self-congratulating progressives to move here. Maybe that's what we want.
The majority did give us 8 years of Bush, which did suck, but what is your alternative exactly? A world where the mayor of Portland, as one member of a council, which is in turn just one member of a large group of regional partners, to single-handedly be able to squash major projects because the BTA tells him that's what "Portland wants"? I'd rather have democracy and risk the Bushes of the world.
The majority did give us 8 years of Bush, which did suck, but what is your alternative exactly? A world where the mayor of Portland, as one member of a council, which is in turn just one member of a large group of regional partners, to single-handedly be able to squash major projects because the BTA tells him that's what "Portland wants"? I'd rather have democracy and risk the Bushes of the world.
29
Blabby, as far as presumptions go, it is you who missed the mark, because I was born in Portland, moved to Houston for 7 years, and then moved back, so I've seen the worst, and I don't want that for my hometown. Neither do a lot of other forward thinking people here, and that has been that way for a while -- witness those who stopped the Mount Hood freeway years ago and got light rail with that federal money instead.
As for your democracy argument... a MAJORITY of voters chose Sam and his policies. If he's not sticking to them, we'll hold him accountable. And while we're at it, a MAJORITY of voters chose the Metro council president, who ALSO doesn't want 12 lanes. See a pattern?
As for your democracy argument... a MAJORITY of voters chose Sam and his policies. If he's not sticking to them, we'll hold him accountable. And while we're at it, a MAJORITY of voters chose the Metro council president, who ALSO doesn't want 12 lanes. See a pattern?
30
Blabby,
Your ideal democracy, or ideal of democracy, doesn't accurately reflect how we come to terms with issues that affect us as a group. I can think of a public health issue that is analogous, in many ways, to the transportation issues we are discussing here.
At one time not so many years ago cigarette smoking was ubiquitous in public and private establishments. People smoked at the office, at the restaurant and of course at home. It was remarkably integrated and accepted in our society. Strangely though the percentage of those who smoked in this country (since we have been tracking it) was never in the majority. Now days of course if you want a cigarette you have to go outside almost everywhere. It's now common and acceptable at ones home to ask smokers to go outside because frankly, the stuff is poison.
How and why did we as a society create those cultural norms that caused conditions leading to poor health and quality of life for us. I'll leave that to you to ponder and will put to you that we have created analogous conditions with our transportation system, public and private, as well. Conditions that have decreased our quality of life and our personal and public health.
There was never a "democratic majority" of smokers in the community who legislated or engineered our social policy around that issue. But as the data began to show, starting in 1964, smoking wasn't doing us right as a group. Slowly the wisdom imparted by collected data, continued research and the tenacious activism of individuals got us to where we are now with regard to smoking.
Today we have a burgeoning collection of data around the effects our flawed transportation system is having and has already had on our environment, our quality of life and our public and personal health. Eyes are opening to to this and in Portland the tenacious activists are hard at work.
Making transportation policy decisions based on the current behavior or beliefs of the majority of citizens despite the data and actual examples in other cities on the planet is just good for now...and that's not good enough any more!
More...
Your ideal democracy, or ideal of democracy, doesn't accurately reflect how we come to terms with issues that affect us as a group. I can think of a public health issue that is analogous, in many ways, to the transportation issues we are discussing here.
At one time not so many years ago cigarette smoking was ubiquitous in public and private establishments. People smoked at the office, at the restaurant and of course at home. It was remarkably integrated and accepted in our society. Strangely though the percentage of those who smoked in this country (since we have been tracking it) was never in the majority. Now days of course if you want a cigarette you have to go outside almost everywhere. It's now common and acceptable at ones home to ask smokers to go outside because frankly, the stuff is poison.
How and why did we as a society create those cultural norms that caused conditions leading to poor health and quality of life for us. I'll leave that to you to ponder and will put to you that we have created analogous conditions with our transportation system, public and private, as well. Conditions that have decreased our quality of life and our personal and public health.
There was never a "democratic majority" of smokers in the community who legislated or engineered our social policy around that issue. But as the data began to show, starting in 1964, smoking wasn't doing us right as a group. Slowly the wisdom imparted by collected data, continued research and the tenacious activism of individuals got us to where we are now with regard to smoking.
Today we have a burgeoning collection of data around the effects our flawed transportation system is having and has already had on our environment, our quality of life and our public and personal health. Eyes are opening to to this and in Portland the tenacious activists are hard at work.
Making transportation policy decisions based on the current behavior or beliefs of the majority of citizens despite the data and actual examples in other cities on the planet is just good for now...and that's not good enough any more!
31
Let's remember that the 12-lane bridge is the better option. The smaller bridge would not support the light rail in the same way, ie there would be a SECOND bridge built, and we'd be putting more supports in the water, and that's not sustainable either. Think of it this way, the 12-lane bridge is an investment in our future, where as the smaller bridge would only need to be readdressed sooner. I'm all for the new bridge.
32
I'm not saying "bigger is better", but a bridge that successfully integrates a light rail line into SW Washington and doesn't create choke points farther south on I-5 is the best option.
Biking is only a feasible option for trips of a certain length; you can only ride so fast in traffic safely - the exertion needed to propel the bike is distracting. And despite what people think, biking is only possible for a small percentage of people - those who are 1.) physically fit; 2.) live close enough to their work to be able to bike; 3.) have bosses who don't care if they come in sweaty or late.
Biking is only a feasible option for trips of a certain length; you can only ride so fast in traffic safely - the exertion needed to propel the bike is distracting. And despite what people think, biking is only possible for a small percentage of people - those who are 1.) physically fit; 2.) live close enough to their work to be able to bike; 3.) have bosses who don't care if they come in sweaty or late.
Most Commented on Blogtown, PDX
-
City's "Overnight Sleeping" Program Finds First Host—and Neighbors React in Ugly Fashion by Denis C. Theriault
-
Game of Thrones Recap: Calm Before the Storm Edition by Joe Streckert
-
Portland Button Works Opens on Killingsworth by Alison Hallett
-
We're Number One! by Alex Zielinski
-
Win Tickets to Hecklevision: Point Break! by Erik Henriksen
-
Thursday TV Recaps for Poor People! The Final Finales. by Elinor Jones
-
Good Morning, News! by Nathan Gilles
-
Weekend Eatings: Corazón and The Slide Inn by Marjorie Skinner
-
North Williams Open House by Alex Zielinski
-
Mad Men: Christmas in Spring by Jacob Schraer
Our Friends
- UrbanHonking
- Culture Shock
- Portland Roundball Society
- Steph Cassano
- Cort and Fatboy
- Street Roots
- Powell's Books Blog
- Portland Transport
- Portland Afoot
- Bike Portland
- Eater: PDX
- Portland Food and Drink
- Mr. Movie
- Sunday Softball
- BlueOregon
- Sightline Institute
- Ultra: Arts Portland
- Bitch Magazine
- Blazer's Edge
- Reading Local: Portland
- Portland Food Carts
- Stumptown Vegans
Our Enemies
The Handyman Pro - Your Honey-Do Specialist
Don’t let our name fool you. The Handyman Pro, LLC is a repair and remodel service provider with over 25-years experience. We cover all aspects of construction and repairs for residential and commercial clients.
Bands Page
Housing
Jobs
Musicians
For Sale
Wheels
Services
Health
The Arts
Friends 'N' Neighbors
Bulletin Board
Personals
Adult
RSSGoing to Seattle?
Comments (32) RSS