Finding out about stuff - or not

I belong to several listserves - e-mail groups where a message sent to the list goes out to all subscribers. Some are on neighborhood themes, others on parks, environmental protection, union updates, social justice, prison reform, nursing legislation, immigrant issues, cultural events. Some of the information I post here originated in an e-mail in my inbox I found interesting.

But these listserves are by subscription only. They're free, but you have to know what and where they are, and sign up, to receive the messages. One of the major barriers neighbors face when trying to be active in civic issues, is that we don't know what we don't know.

And the amount of time I spend researching many Portland issues to share with you on this blog is a little ridiculous, considering the City, County, and other agencies have staff whose job is public outreach and citizen involvement. I want to see easy access to understandable information for everyone. If a citizen knows which agency is responsible for something, it should be easy to go to that agency's site and find out what's happening on the topic.

Case example: I recently received a message from Chris Smith via the NeighborsWestNorthWest listserve, inviting the public to a meeting to "vision" (cough, splutter, gag) future routes for the Portland Streetcar. Chris volunteers as chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Streetcar, and by posting the notice on the WNW listserve is evidently trying to reach a broader audience than just committee members. The Streetcar has come up here several times over the past week, so I thought I'd check into this meeting and see what additional background information I could find about it. The notice says:

"Get on board and join Commissioner Sam Adams for a brainstorming session to discuss the future of streetcars in Portland. In addition to learning more about the current and future plans for streetcar corridors, participants will be able to roll up their sleeves and work with friends, neighbors, City of Portland planning staff and Commissioner Sam to discuss where future streetcar corridors could occur. Information from the workshop will help the Portland Office of Transportation (PDOT) with preparations for the City of Portland Streetcar System Plan study scheduled to start in September 2007.

Saturday July 28, 2007, 9am to Noon

University Place Conference Center
310 SW Lincoln Street, Portland, OR 97201

Agenda [given in detail in original message]

But wait, there's more! If you'd like a full Streetcar immersion experience, please consider coming to the Reconnecting America Regional (Pacific Northwest) Streetcar Workshop the day before. See the invitation postcard, or check out details at www.reconnectingamerica.org/public/workshops. ($75 cost)."

OK, so given that content, I figured CommissionerSam.com might be a good place to start. Even when I type "streetcar" into the search feature there, I can't find anything about the meeting or planning process there. So I went to PortlandStreetcar.org, after Googling to find it's a dot org rather than a dot com. Not obvious there, either. I don't see a search feature there, but going to "Future Planning" then "Portland" then "Portland", I get a Metro page "Not Found". OK, I'll try PortlandOnLine. Nope, not on the front page there, either. Its News & Issues & Proposed Policy link? Nada. Office of Transportation? Not seeing it, even with the Search function. I don't even see the July 28 meeting notice on any of these sites, let alone additional information about the planning process. And these web pages are agency pages. They're not run by volunteers who may not have had time to update them.

It's possible the meeting is announced on the "Info" e-mail sent out from the Mayor's Office periodically. That lists all meetings on all topics, and frankly it's one that arrives in my mailbox and tends to be deleted unread. It's too much information, in an unsorted format - I don't have time to sift through it. Ditto the Office of Neighborhood Involvement E-notification service - it estimates 8 - 10 e-mails will be sent per week, with City press releases and meeting announcements. Only the most diligent and most involved citizens would sign up for that. And with both, again, you have to sign up, to receive the information. Citizens don't know what they don't know.

I'm using the Streetcar meeting only as an example, given the transportation discussion here this past week. This kind of thing happens in multiple other "public involvement" processes. My point is, people shouldn't have to know they need to sign up for various notification messages, in order to find out information. Citizens should be able to find out about upcoming meetings and plans in progress, whenever they choose, by going to the relevant agency web site. Do you see how this plays in to my post a week or so ago, "This system was not designed for you"?

If you're a citizen suddenly waking up with a burning desire to have more input into Streetcar planning (perhaps as a result of wondering about funding crosswalks and sidewalks), you have to know where to look before you can find out about the meetings. Even if you're someone like me, pretty much a Portland civic engagement groupie, you wouldn't know about the meeting unless you happen to be subscribed to the right listserves. You have to sign up for multiple listserves (a dozen or more of them, for me), or attend a Neighborhood Association where all the interest area committees are fully staffed with volunteers who give detailed reports each month, or it's very difficult to find out what you're missing. And so public meetings and citizen engagement tend to involve mostly the people who've been involved before - who generally support whatever's being proposed. The question posed becomes not whether to do something, but how to do it.

I'm giving up on background research for the Streetcar meeting. What I really want to know is, when is the bus improvement vision plan workshop? I'll let you know if I can find out anything.

I liked this kid-tested,

I liked this kid-tested, parent-safe video ditty doing an holistic-some rendition of How things work and Why we do this, in general. Unless it's How things do this and Why we work ... finding out about stuff - or not. www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=3982 .

Amanda, On the flip side,

Amanda, On the flip side, it's a challenge to get information out. I'm trying to get the word about the Streetcar workshop spread as far and wide as possible and I have to send or submit it to many, many places. In addition to sending it the Neighbors W/NW listserv, I've submitted it to the ONI notification list. I imagine it will take them a day or two to approve it and get it out. It will be on my blog tomorrow, and Sam's office may choose to put it on CommissionerSam.com. It's as hard for me to put the information in all the places someone might look for it as it is for you to figure out where to look for it :-) I agree with your frustration about e-mail, I'm finding RSS is a much better way to try to stay current on what's going on. Maybe we need a giant 'citizen engagement' RSS aggregator that can manage all this stuff and organize it by keyword?

"It's as hard for me to put

"It's as hard for me to put the information in all the places someone might look for it as it is for you to figure out where to look for it" I know. I'm not talking about volunteer-run sites, and I commend your efforts to get the word out. My main concern is official agency web pages that don't carry important information - especially time-sensitive/temporary content. That's where citizens would/should look first. It shouldn't be up to citizen volunteers to send it to a gazillion listserves, or to put it on their own blogs and suchlike. People interested in joining the streetcar debate would likely follow the paths and options I tried, to find out how/where/when to be involved. At least one, and preferably all four of the Streetcar, CommissionerSam, PortlandOnLine, and Transportation sites should have the project and meeting information clearly posted on their front pages. As for RSS, I suspect many, like me, are a little behind on knowing about and using that technology. Would anyone care to prepare a Guest Post on what RSS is and how to use it to save time rather than spending more sifting through yet more incoming information?

when is the bus improvement

when is the bus improvement vision plan workshop? Now there's a non-starter, Amanda. When we sorta, kinda got a chance to provide input on the streetcar versus bus improvements in the humorously named "alternatives" analysis for the Central Eastside...the choice was NO improved bus service. Or the streetcar. What was funny too --as long as I've hijacked this thread to talk about it-- METRO's web page about this meeting had the wrong date and time listed. And the link to the report, if I remember right, didn't work when I first went to look at it. It got fixed when I let them know, though. The problem is less with people's bad intentions, I think, it's their failure to use the "power of the internet" in ways that are customer friendly. ("Blue Oregon" is well-designed by professionals, driven by a passion for what they do, and, no doubt, hopeful about getting new clients. "Jack Bog's Blog" is pretty amazing, I think, for something put out by one lone voice barking at the moon or City Council.) PortlandOnLine finally put a link to the Council Calendar on the front page just recently...but at the same time deleted the link to "Watch online videos" which was a way to connect fairly directly to the streaming-video live coverage of Council meetings (well, of course if you already knew that 'watch online videos' was about Council meetings and not some strange City of Portland porno site. Part of the problem, too, is that there is so much information potentially available, that organizing it to be user friendly is a challenge in itself. Then, of course, there's the politics of a city-sponsored blog...what's important to Sam might not necessarily be important to Randy, and who gets to pick and choose what goes where, and what links to what? Anyway, I think the "recent posts" feature makes reading your blog a lot easier, and a lot more efficient.

"When we sorta, kinda got a

"When we sorta, kinda got a chance to provide input on the streetcar versus bus improvements in the humorously named "alternatives" analysis for the Central Eastside...the choice was NO improved bus service. Or the streetcar." Which agency sponsored that meeting, Frank? Tri-Met, Portland Streetcar, City of Portland, or all three?

Frank is referring to a

Frank is referring to a transit Alternatives Analysis (part of the Federal Transit Administration sanctioned funding process) overseen by Metro, although the City, TriMet and Portland Streetcar were participants. The analysis compared Streetcar and buses at comparable frequencies (headways). It did not include such bus enhancements as queue-jump lanes, which no one realistically expected would ever be built.

It did not include such bus

It did not include such bus enhancements as queue-jump lanes, which no one realistically expected would ever be built. It also didn't include new buses, new bus lines, or higher frequencies. It offered nothing in the way of enhanced bus service. Nothing. Period. Some "alternative." And all this to show that an "alternatives analysis" was done even though the only alternative looked at was, well, not to do anything.

Frank, I don't think that's

Frank, I don't think that's quite fair. The analysis basically put Streetcars and buses on the same route at the same frequency (so the line would in fact have been different than the current #6, as it would have followed the portion of the 'loop' not already served by Streetcar). I can assure that the modeling process does not account for the age of the vehicle, either a bus or a Streetcar. The reality is that Streetcar scored much higher on both ridership (because no transfers are required and riders have a strong preference for Streetcars over buses) and development potential. If the analysis is 'unfair' it's because half the loop is already built out with Streetcar tracks and doing the other half with buses rather than Streetcars creates a transfer disadvantage.

I don't understand your

I don't understand your comment, Chris. The majority of bus lines go far outside the close-in areas served by the Streetcar. Are future expansion plans calling for running the streetcar up MLK, like the number 6 bus, and into outlying neighborhoods on other routes? Was this meeting looking at the needs/preferences of users of the whole system, or just those of the residents and businesses along the proposed close-in Streetcar lines?

Amanda, we're not talking

Amanda, we're not talking about a meeting, we're talking about a multi-year public process (with many public meetings and several rounds of open houses) to evaluate a Central-city circulator loop. Creating such a loop creates a hub from which Streetcar lines to other neighborhoods can originate. The workshop on the 28th is the first step in beginning to plan such lines. But if you're asking the question, did the analysis process look at whether the next project should be a circular hub, or a corridor 'spoke'? No it did not, any more than the I-205 Light Rail analysis looked at whether Clackamas County or Clark County was the next logical corridor. The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the level at which those kinds of decisions are made and they tend to be more political (e.g., it was Clackamas County's 'turn' to get LRT) than technical although that is changing somewhat as Rex Burkholder is striving to make this round of updates to the RTP more performance-driven. And both the City and Metro/TriMet are undertaking city-wide and regional rail planning exercises which should drive much more systematic thinking (and the City and regional plans WILL coordinate with each other). Again, the Portland workshop is one of the first steps in this process. So everyone with an interest in this topic should PLEASE come on the 28th! Details at: http://portlandtransport.com/archives/2007/07/help_vision_por.html

http://www.metro-region.org/library_docs/trans/eastside_lpa_72006.pdf I think my comment is completely fair, Chris. From the report: "the mode decision chooses between streetcar and the no-build bus network." The "analysis" compares spending several hundred million dollars on a streetcar line versus a "no build bus network"...i.e. no bus improvements. And a line that moves people from Lloyd Center to OMSI does what, exactly, for the folks who live in the Central Eastside Industrial District, which includes my Hosford-Abernethy neighborhood. Oh, wait...we don't live where the line goes through. This isn't about serving us on the eastside...it's about new development. Nothing wrong with that necessarily, unless it means Tri-Met has less money for other transit, and the Central Eastside Industrial District folks will have to have parking meters to help pay for operating costs, which they say they don't want. This line isn't being built to serve the people who live here and need better transit. It is being built to serve the development community. I'd take a new streetcar up Hawthorne and out Foster over the #14 bus in a heartbeat. But since we're already built out --well, except for the new condo towers springing up all over our SE neighborhood-- we existing residents lack the development "potential" that is so enticing on MLK in the Central Eastside Industrial District. Is it the best bang for the transit buck? "Free" fed money to help build the thing is hard to turn your nose up at. But is there equity in how we're allocating transit money throughout the city? I don't think so. But back to Amanda's point...it's certainly important to have access to public documents in a timely manner. I think we're still just figuring out how to maximize the utility of the 'net.

This line isn't being built

This line isn't being built to serve the people who live here and need better transit. It is being built to serve the development community. I'll accept that it's being built to serve development, to a large extent (there's also lots of benefit to existing economic activity, although I agree it doesn't serve much existing residential activity). But I think the beneficiary is the whole region. By helping put 4000+ new housing units in the Central City, we avoid putting those at the edge of the region, where those same households would generate many more auto trips and put pressure on expanding the Urban Growth Boundary. Some developer somewhere is going to build those 4,000 units. I'd prefer it was at the center of the region rather than the edge. This is an exercise in moving toward accommodating the next million people coming to our region (they'll be here in 20 years) in a much more sustainable way. So come on the 28th and help vision that line out Hawthorne and Foster!

Posting at 3 and 4 in the

Posting at 3 and 4 in the morning...we need to get a life, Chris. :-) I was at a wine tasting event Sunday, and one of the things the owners of Elk Cove said was how important the urban growth boundary was for making our wine industry --now a billion dollar plus industry-- possible. Saturday night we were at "horse country" off Wilsonville Road helping do a benefit at the Country Classic for Forward Stride. Friday Anne and I took a day of vacation to ride horses through the vineyards and filbert orchards of Dundee Hills. We are very, very "blessed" (and that is not a word I ordinarily use) to live in Oregon. We need to be really, really careful in how we proceed, to not screw things up. Chris' Portland Transport by the way, is one of the better blogs around...whether we agree on streetcar routes or not.

We are very, very "blessed"

We are very, very "blessed" to live in Oregon. Amen - thanks, Frank. P.S. Amanda, I think you blog clock is not on daylight savings. I posted at 5:45, not 4:45 :-)

The clock on this blog has a

The clock on this blog has a mind of its own, throughout the year. All times posted in comments are relative to each other, rather than to real time. I haven't found a way to edit them in comments, either. The only times shown that are generally accurate are the times of main posts, which I set before hitting "Submit".... except that articles posted by the auto-scheduler are on the site's time. It's one of those things that in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter - even in the small scheme. "Some developer somewhere is going to build those 4,000 units. I'd prefer it was at the center of the region rather than the edge." We have plenty of zoned capacity for new units/development (homes, I like to call them) in Portland. What we don't have is a plan for providing infrastructure and services to infill development in Arnold Creek, Russell, Pleasant Valley, and a host of other neighborhoods which aren't on "the edge" of the Metro area. They're in Portland, and still much closer in than homes in the suburbs. And if we want the Central City to remain a hub of employment, recreation, and shopping (which I believe we do), we need to look for ways to make the commute in more pleasant and convenient from all neighborhoods, not just those close enough to merit a Streetcar line.

"And both the City and

"And both the City and Metro/TriMet are undertaking city-wide and regional rail planning exercises which should drive much more systematic thinking (and the City and regional plans WILL coordinate with each other)." Good! Will that discussion include making the Streetcar and MAX compatible? I heard the two can't use the same rails because the light rail cars are four inches wider than the Streetcar, is that correct? How much redundancy is there from having two agencies planning fixed rail transit in Portland? And/or, what are the advantages of keeping MAX and the Streetcar separate?

We have plenty of zoned

We have plenty of zoned capacity for new units/development (homes, I like to call them) in Portland. What we don't have is a plan for providing infrastructure and services to infill development in Arnold Creek, Russell, Pleasant Valley, and a host of other neighborhoods which aren't on "the edge" of the Metro area. They're in Portland, and still much closer in than homes in the suburbs. And if we want the Central City to remain a hub of employment, recreation, and shopping (which I believe we do), we need to look for ways to make the commute in more pleasant and convenient from all neighborhoods, not just those close enough to merit a Streetcar line. Agreed, but my experience is that there is a lot of resistance to actually building that infill density in the established neighborhoods. It's a lot easier in EX zoned areas like the MLK/Grand corridor in the Central Eastside (where people will be able to live and work in the same neighborhood). I think the only thing wrong with Streetcar is that it doesn't reach enough neighborhoods yet :-) Which we're trying to fix with the City-wide rail plan. Which is why EVERYONE should come on the 28th and tell us where the best Streetcar opportunities would be in YOUR neighborhood [am I starting to get my point across? :-)]. Good! Will that discussion include making the Streetcar and MAX compatible? I heard the two can't use the same rails because the light rail cars are four inches wider than the Streetcar, is that correct? How much redundancy is there from having two agencies planning fixed rail transit in Portland? And/or, what are the advantages of keeping MAX and the Streetcar separate? In fact the Streetcar Loop project is driving that discussion as there is a desire to have the rails on MLK/Grand provide an opportunity to move MAX cars from the Rose Quarter to the new southern bridge (to be built as part of Milwaukie MAX) in the event of an emergency on the Steel Bridge (which will soon be carry FOUR different MAX lines). The issue is that Streetcar vehicles are narrower, so if you build the platforms for MAX, there's a gap between the platform and Streetcar. Technologies to deal with this (think movable platforms) are being looked at. Keep in mind that from an urban design point of view, a Streetcar vehicle is a must more appropriate scale for neighborhood streets. MAX is great on Yamhill and Morrison downtown, but it would completely overwhelm the streetscape on a street like Hawthorne. Asking whether TriMet or the City should manage Streetcar is a legitimate question for the long term. The reality is that when those of us who believed that Streetcar could do things for the region that MAX couldn't initially approached TriMet, we got a cold shoulder (they called it a 'donkey trolley' back then). TriMet has come a long way and is now a great partner with the City on Streetcar (and is a champion of using Streetcar in the Willamette Shorline corridor, which is too narrow for MAX, to get to Lake Oswego). I'm sure over time it will still evolve, but the organizational missions still have some differences (Streetcar is as much placemaking as transportation, TriMet is still focused primarily on moving people).

Lots of useful information -

Lots of useful information - thanks, Chris. I have to contest a couple of your points: "Agreed, but my experience is that there is a lot of resistance to actually building that infill density in the established neighborhoods." Doesn't make any difference in most cases. If a lot is zoned for development, in most neighborhoods the lots are getting developed, whether the neighbors like it or not. And it isn't a case of either homes on infill lots, or homes in EX zones close in. The properties are owned by different people, and they all want to develop and make their profits. Condo developers and single family home developers are often different businesspeople. The City should publish reports of how many homes are being developed in each neighborhood, to help decide where to prioritize allocation of funds for services. There are huge numbers of homes being developed in apartment buildings in the Outer Southeast plan area, without concurrent provision of improved bus service, parks, or other facilities that would make those new homes good places to live. "MAX is great on Yamhill and Morrison downtown, but it would completely overwhelm the streetscape on a street like Hawthorne." It's four inches wider, is that correct? MAX would overwhelm a neighborhood street mostly because it uses dedicated right-of-way - whcih makes it faster than the Streetcar which has to share the space on the road, and wait for car/truck drivers to get out of the way. One problem with the meeting on the 28th, Chris, is that people who live in neighborhoods away from the central core are going to assume that Streetcar service isn't coming anywhere near them within their lifetimes. So they/we aren't giving up precious family time over the summer to come to the meeting, and the voices of people who need better bus (or other form of transit) service along the spokes of the wheel won't be part of the conversation. You nailed it when you (correctly in my opinion) identified the Streetcar as placemaking, TriMet as people-moving. At some point, outer neighborhoods need both funds for placemaking, and more funds for people-moving. In our discussions last week on Sam's funding initiative for basic improvements in neighborhoods, my general sense was that people believe funds for close-in fixed rail improvements take away money from basic bus, bike, and pedestrian facilities. I continue to believe that conception (whether true or false) should be addressed head on, before moving forward with either new funding or new Steetcar lines.

I'm doing this from memory,

I'm doing this from memory, but I think MAX is more like eight inches wider, which means a 4 inch gap. But MAX is also MUCH longer, taller and heavier (and 2-3x more expensive to build). I think you correctly identify the issue of HOW we develop to higher densities in a manner compatible with our neighborhoods as one of the key challenges to implementing the 2040 plan. I hope folks from the outer neighborhoods are reading this blog and will learn that the City-wide plan affects them too. But the meeting on the 28th is only a first informal opportunity to start brainstorming (driven by the national Streetcar conference happening here the day before). The City-wide plan will have a full-blown public involvement effort that will reach out to all neighborhoods. And I think Sam will be spending a LOT of time over the next 6 months explaining why transit investments are not the cause of the street maintenance backlog. It's going to have to be a deep and prolonged conversation to succeed!

Chris: can you point me to a

Chris: can you point me to a relatively unbiased discussion of buses vs streetcars? I've ridden both. To my uneducated mind, streetcars seem MUCH more expensive, waste the interior space, and are far less flexible than buses which don't need to follow a rail. There must be good arguments for them that I haven't seen. Amanda: as the owner of an acronym-free site, could you explain what EX-zones are? Both: you speak of "placemaking" vs "people moving". Could you explain placemaking? People moving seems easy to understand - I thought that was what all the options were for.

Amanda: as the owner of an

Amanda: as the owner of an acronym-free site, could you explain what EX-zones are? Ooh, you got me! Sorry, and thanks for asking. All the different categories in Portland's Zoning Code zones are designated by two or three letters/numbers. EX is the Central Employment zone. It's considered one of the most flexible high-intensity zones, because it allows residential, commercial, industrial, and/or office uses. The Zoning Code says of it: "Central Employment. This zone implements the Central Employment map designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The zone allows mixed-uses and is intended for areas in the center of the City that have predominantly industrial typedevelopment. The intent of the zone is to allow industrial and commercial useswhich need a central location. Residential uses are allowed, but are not intended to predominate or set development standards for other uses in the area. The development standards are intended to allow new development which is similar in character to existing development." Maximum height is 65' (unless increased by a Plan District, as it is in South Waterfront), 100% of the lot may be covered, and no landscaping is required. Regarding "placemaking": A lot of planning and zoning is aimed at not just cramming stuff in, but making life better for those already here as well as for new residents and businesses. Portland is known for "making the land use-transportation connection", i.e., zoning for more homes and businesses along fixed-line facilities such as MAX and the Streetcar, and in the Central City. And then adding other features, such as the parks in the Pearl, to make the whole thing work together and a nice place to live. We do far less well in "the land use-transportation connection"/placemaking with regard to bus service. Planners/politicians/plans rezone arterials on bus routes to add capacity for more homes and businesses, but service improvements and infrastructure such as sidewalks and crosswalks rarely seem to follow. Bus transit is too often seen as transportation only, and second-class transportation at that. It doesn't come with plans for parks or even paved streets on side-roads, the way fixed-route lines have been used to leverage other improvements by public and private development. So the "placemaking" doesn't happen, and that just reinforces the notion that to get "good" new development, fixed-rail lines are the way to go. It doesn't have to be that way, in my opinion.

Pete, EX zoning is the

Pete, EX zoning is the Portland code for mixed use - you can combine housing, employment and retail uses in one place, rather than separating them as suburban zoning traditionally does. It also generally coincides (but doesn't have to) with fairly aggressive FAR (floor area ratio) and taller height limits. Which is a short way of saying that the MLK/Grand corridor has potential for development of a fair number of taller, denser buildings that could be condos, apartments, offices or retail (most likely combinations of all of that). As to buses versus Streetcar here is a short comparison: Streetcar: - quieter - no diesel smell - smoother ride - fixed route - higher capital cost - less polluting (assuming a clean source of electricity) - catenary wires create some visual clutter - less confusion about routes (you can see where the rails go) Many would also argue that there is an intangible rider preference, that's debatable. Bus: - louder - engine smells (at least until we get new fuels) - bumpier ride (buses pull to the side to load which means they cross the drainage 'camber' of the road so they tilt) - flexible routing - lower capital cost - more polluting (again, new fuels could help) - no wires - for riders unfamilier with the system, potential confusion about routes There is a hybrid form called a trolley bus that is electric and uses catenary wires but no rails (and can sometimes operate for short distances on batteries without the wires). Some have advocated for trolley buses here instead of Streecars. The fixed route of Streetcar is actually an advantage in terms of placemaking (creating vibrant places that people like to be in). The rails are a guarantee to nearby property owners that there will be good service for a long time to come, thus the property owners are willing to invest more in their properties. A bus could be rerouted tomorrow (perhaps an advantage to the transit provider and maybe the riding public, but a disadvantage to the adjacent property owner). I hope that was reasonably dispassionate, although my bias is clear for Streetcars. I can tell you that as a neighborhood transportation chair, if I suggested running a bus on someone's street, I got angry phone calls. I got requests for Streetcars :-)

Amanda: as the owner of an

Amanda: as the owner of an acronym-free site, could you explain what EX-zones are? Ooh, you got me! Sorry, and thanks for asking. All the different categories in Portland's Zoning Code zones are designated by two or three letters/numbers. EX is the Central Employment zone. It's considered one of the most flexible high-intensity zones, because it allows residential, commercial, industrial, and/or office uses. The Zoning Code says of it: "Central Employment. This zone implements the Central Employment map designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The zone allows mixed-uses and is intended for areas in the center of the City that have predominantly industrial typedevelopment. The intent of the zone is to allow industrial and commercial useswhich need a central location. Residential uses are allowed, but are not intended to predominate or set development standards for other uses in the area. The development standards are intended to allow new development which is similar in character to existing development." Maximum height is 65' (unless increased by a Plan District, as it is in South Waterfront), 100% of the lot may be covered, and no landscaping is required. Regarding "placemaking": A lot of planning and zoning is aimed at not just cramming stuff in, but making life better for those already here as well as for new residents and businesses. Portland is known for "making the land use-transportation connection", i.e., zoning for more homes and businesses along fixed-line facilities such as MAX and the Streetcar, and in the Central City. And then adding other features, such as the parks in the Pearl, to make the whole thing work together and a nice place to live. We do far less well in "the land use-transportation connection"/placemaking with regard to bus service. Planners/politicians/plans rezone arterials on bus routes to add capacity for more homes and businesses, but service improvements and infrastructure such as sidewalks and crosswalks rarely seem to follow. Bus transit is too often seen as transportation only, and second-class transportation at that. It doesn't come with plans for parks or even paved streets on side-roads, the way fixed-route lines have been used to leverage other improvements by public and private development. So the "placemaking" doesn't happen, and that just reinforces the notion that to get "good" new development, fixed-rail lines are the way to go - even if in terms of moving people from A to B, they are far more expensive. It doesn't have to be that way, in my opinion.

Amanda: as the owner of an

Amanda: as the owner of an acronym-free site, could you explain what EX-zones are? Ooh, you got me! Sorry, and thanks for asking. All the different categories in Portland's Zoning Code zones are designated by two or three letters/numbers. EX is the Central Employment zone. It's considered one of the most flexible high-intensity zones, because it allows residential, commercial, industrial, and/or office uses. The Zoning Code says of it: "Central Employment. This zone implements the Central Employment map designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The zone allows mixed-uses and is intended for areas in the center of the City that have predominantly industrial type development. The intent of the zone is to allow industrial and commercial uses which need a central location. Residential uses are allowed, but are not intended to predominate or set development standards for other uses in the area. The development standards are intended to allow new development which is similar in character to existing development." Maximum height is 65' (unless increased by a Plan District, as it is in South Waterfront), 100% of the lot may be covered, and no landscaping is required. Regarding "placemaking": A lot of planning and zoning is aimed at not just cramming stuff in, but making life better for those already here as well as for new residents and businesses. Portland is known for "making the land use-transportation connection", i.e., zoning for more homes and businesses along fixed-line facilities such as MAX and the Streetcar, and in the Central City. And then adding other features, such as the parks in the Pearl, to make the whole thing work together and a nice place to live. We do far less well in "the land use-transportation connection"/placemaking with regard to bus service. Planners/politicians/plans rezone arterials on bus routes to add capacity for more homes and businesses, but service improvements and infrastructure such as sidewalks and crosswalks rarely seem to follow. Bus transit is too often seen as transportation only, and second-class transportation at that. It doesn't come with plans for parks or even paved streets on side-roads, the way fixed-route lines have been used to leverage other improvements by public and private development. So the "placemaking" doesn't happen, and that just reinforces the notion that to get "good" new development, fixed-rail lines are the way to go - even if in terms of moving people from A to B, they are far more expensive. Fixed-rail's cost is justified by its function as a "development engine", not by its cost per person-moving mile or its utitity in giving the most people better ways to get where they want to go. The lack of placemaking along bus routes doesn't have to be that way, in my opinion, and should be corrected.

Amanda: Thanks for the

Amanda: Thanks for the explanation of EX-zones and placemaking. Chris: I appreciate your summary, but wonder if you know of a more in-depth, independent analysis. Both again: With the explanation of placemaking, I have to agree with Frank's post - Streetcars seem to be in support of development, not of the people who live here. As Amanda said, most of us will not live to see a streetcar anywhere near out house and so have MUCH more interest in a better bus system. Better fuels is important, but relatively easy and inexpensive compared to buying a streetcar or two. I'll close by realizing that Amanda's question in the original post is far more important to me than streetcars: "When is the bus improvement vision plan workshop?" For that I'd close my shop on Saturday and go!

I'm sorry, I have not seen

I'm sorry, I have not seen an independent analysis of bus vs. Streetcar. But I think placemaking IS a key value. We need to create the kind of places where people can live, work, shop and go to school without making long auto trips. That is the only way that we can hope to: 1) Add a million people to region without sprawling or chewing up very high value farmland and landscape. 2) Survive peak oil. 3) Help hold off devastating climate change. Buses are great transportation, but they don't help create the places that will deal with #1-3. I think if we focus together as a community, we CAN get Streetcars to lots of our neighborhoods. After all, that how many of our neighborhoods got built in the first place!

"Buses are great

"Buses are great transportation, but they don't help create the places that will deal with #1-3." Because elected leaders, citizen committees, and volunteer/appointed boards have chosen not to create places around bus routes. In my home town of Leeds, England, they got rid of the fixed-rail trolleys and improved the bus service. Downtown and the transit routes are thriving places where commerce and development depend on the bus service like those adjacent to the streetcar here. I was outraged this past May to find they've "improved" the system by adding some additional names - transit lines named for colors, like our MAX lines. For the previous 45 years, the buses had the same numbers and the same routes, and people knew where to get them and depended on them being in the same place. The routes are still the same, they just added the color names to make it easier for people to remember their route (... but still, nobody asked my permission. Huh!) It's a choice. We could choose to have the best bus service in the United States. We have not made that choice. We haven't invested in alternative-fuel buses, we haven't provided pedestrian and resident/commercial amenities along bus routes. Buses are NOT great transportation here in Portland. They don't run frequently enough, they don't go where people want/need to go, and they are too often full to overflowing. They're only great in comparison with other cities with even worse bus systems, or nothing.

Amanda, fair points and I

Amanda, fair points and I wish we had more total transit operating dollars so we could put more investment in better bus service, but I think the critical distinction remains, buses don't attract private sector investment to nearly the same extent that Streetcars do (which is not to say that better bus service would not attract SOME private sector investment).

I contend that's partly

I contend that's partly because of the way it's been set up, Chris. If businesses knew they could depend on bus lines staying in place for 40 years, if the City prioritized livability improvements on bus routes the way it does on fixed-rail lines, and if the buses themselves were clean and comfortable enough to attract urban professionals who delight in fixed-rail travel, then businesses would be happy to invest along bus lines - because more people would be using them. And in fact, since we don't have "more total transit operating dollars", many citizens would like to start the conversation about directing more of those dollars to the bus routes more of us actually use.... rather than participating in the next round of visioning new Streetcar lines. We could provide better bus service next year, not in ten or twenty years, if elected leaders and citizen committees/boards made that choice.

Amanda, I don't know how you

Amanda, I don't know how you make a promise that's believable that you won't change a bus line for 20 years :-) But I agree that the choice between bus and rail service is a critical one and would encourage citizens to get involved in Metro's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) process (going on now) and TriMet Transit Improvement Plan (TIP) (which I believe just finished a cycle). But I would also be careful about expectations. While some capital dollar shifts are possible (buying new buses more frequently for example), it's NOT possible to shift the dollars for building rails into bus operations. The capital sources are not legally available for operations. While a service hour of Streetcar or MAX IS more expensive than a service hour of bus service, we're not going to see dramatic increases in bus service by de-emphasizing rail (short of canceling entire corridors like the Milwaukie Light Rail project). The real answer is to work together to grow the pie of operating dollars for ALL transit. Our region has the appetite to use more transit than we can afford to run today. The winning scenario is to enlarge the pie, not fight over how to slice it.

"I don't know how you make a

"I don't know how you make a promise that's believable that you won't change a bus line for 20 years :-)" Well, one way to start would be to have someone in authority at Tri-Met make that promise in writing and posted as a public notice. And then for City Council members to invest in infrastructure and placemakeing along the route, as they do for fixed-rail, so that any transit authority decision-maker would be out of their mind (and out of a job) if they tried to change the route later. "The real answer is to work together to grow the pie of operating dollars for ALL transit. Our region has the appetite to use more transit than we can afford to run today. The winning scenario is to enlarge the pie, not fight over how to slice it." On some issues, I agree with that sentiment. But as I wrote regarding Sam's proposed funding of neighborhood transportation infrastructure, I think the general public doesn't quite believe that today's pie can only be sliced a certain way. What about Oregon cities that don't have fixed rail, do they get no state or federal transportation dollars? How is the pie sliced at those levels, and can we perhaps help change it so that cheaper (and cleaner) bus transportation that helps more people gets more there? What about local money - why is the City spending $23m on upgrades around the reservoirs tomorrow, including perhaps a "Green Street", when just last year the estimated cost was $9m? There may be good answers to these types of questions. If so, citizens need to have easy access to good, clear information spelling out how transportation options of all kinds, and City services of all kinds, are funded, before many will agree the pie needs to be bigger.

citizens need to have easy

citizens need to have easy access to good, clear information spelling out how transportation options of all kinds, and City services of all kinds, are funded, before many will agree the pie needs to be bigger. That's exactly the conversation I think Sam is going to be leading over the next six months or so.

Part of the problem with

Part of the problem with getting citizen input --and I can speak from both sides of the fence on this-- is that there's too much time-wasting, phony-baloney, going-through-the-motions "opportunities for input" that leaves citizens scratching their heads asking: "why did I go to that meeting?" Not to pick on METRO or the East Side Streetcar, but the "alternatives analysis" meeting I attended felt very much like that. I didn't speak, but others did to real alternatives, and you could almost hear the decision makers saying: "That's nice. Next?" Why attend --or speak out-- if it's only to hear your own voice because the decision's been made long ago, and we're simply going through the formalities of a public process? And please understand I am not saying this about Commissioner Adams' efforts to address funding shortfalls in Transportation. On the contrary, I believe he is a good listener. At the same time...we --as citizens-- can spend a half a day (or, really, an hour or so) "brainstorming" where our streetcar lines can go...but, as Amanda asks, shouldn't this be part of a broader discussion of how we spend available transportation dollars? Amd, in reality, aren't we already committed on so many projects that this becomes an exercise in futility? For example, we had, in my part of town, many, many citizens involved in the SE Division Greenstreeting project...meetings galore, producing voluminous charts and graphs and writing ideas on chartpacks. Got the zone changes done for higher density...but then the funding for the transportation component disappears. And, as was the case last night at our Hosford-Abernethy Neighboprhood Association meeting, we're trying to address the "vision" of what we want, but we're forced to address yet another new proposed development at Seven Corners, on Division, but without it being in the context of the needed street improvements to support this kind of project. Transportation is the foundation, but we're building infill housing without it. The street improvements that should be concurrent with the zone changes for density being an unfilled promise, like so many neighborhood plans, sitting on shelves, gathering dust. The oher problem is, even when the bureaucracies are sincere in wanting --and valuing-- input, the pool of engaged citizens is not as deep as we need. We see the same small group of dedicated volunteers, over and over, until they're burned out, or overwhelmed by the time committments. And, often, conflicting time committments...for example, many of the people engaged in the SE Division "vision" process who would like to speak out for a Division corrider streetcar at that Saturday's meeting, well, that's also the morning of our annual Division/Clinton parade and street fair. (Which Commissioner Adams has attended in the past...people joked last night that he should be asked to give back his HAND --Hosford-Abernethy Neighborhood Association-- hat, he was given.) But, actually, as a Hawthorne Boulevard advocate for the streetcar...I'm OK with the fact that the Division Street folks'll be tied up with the parade. Let the straw polls be decided by who can show up at a Saturday morning meeting! But does anyone really believe this is how decisions are made? :-) There's citizen apathy. But there's citizen cynicism, too, and way too much of it is easily justifiable. That's where government needs to make the real breakthrough.

There's citizen apathy. But

There's citizen apathy. But there's citizen cynicism, too, and way too much of it is easily justifiable. That's where government needs to make the real breakthrough. I think citizens need to make the breakthrough into government. Both by electing people who've experienced the "process" from the other side (our side), and by not putting up with poor public process any more. One problem with the Visioning saga is that it's made even more citizens feel that investing their time in civic discussions isn't worthwhile. The intent was good, the implementation lacking. It's given the impression that talking to citizens is all well and good, but to really get things done, go back to the In-Crowd. I wonder whether there are enough people who would like to change the norms in Portland, to insist on a change in the process rather than merely seeking to expand the ranks of the In-Crowd. Especially when even gaining entry to the inner circle of decision-makers seems almost impossible for many.

In an ideal world, there

In an ideal world, there shouldn't be "sides," with citizens on one side, the government on the other. It's our government. And we in government are citizens first and foremost. Just yesterday I ran into a friend outside the Portland building who went from being a neighborhood activist to a public outreach person for city government. When I asked how it was going he said it was mostly good, but the hard thing to get over is suddenly being --in many people's eyes-- a bad guy...just because he's now from the government. In his head he's still the same person he was, but just that label of government employee is enough to put off some people. He finds that frustrating. I find that frustrating too. As our Hosford-Abernethy neighborhood association Land Use & Transportation chair I often find myself in situations where someone is talking to me, we're having a good conversation, and then when I'm asked what I do for a living, and I say I work for the City...I suddenly become suspect. Diminished somehow. At the same time, someone --a fellow bureaucrat-- once wrote in a scathing email about me: "he talks to citizens." As though that made me suspect. Dimished somehow. And sometimes there is that feeling that on "our" side --the government side-- that we circle the wagons. We have our official PIO's to speak for us (that's Public Information Officers, in government-speak). Gotta make sure we're "all on the same page," parroting the party line. The circle-the-wagons mentality isn't limited to government, of course. My son was working for a large insurance company a while back when a scandal broke out, and everyone --down to the mailroom employee level-- was ominously warned about speaking to the press. I think we all need to loosen up a bit. Break down the walls between us. Or maybe just replace them with chain link fences so we can at least keep talking to each other.

Good point. I think

Good point. I think recognizing that the walls and sides exist is one of the first steps to changing and/or dismantling them.

Buses are great

Buses are great transportation, but they don't help create the places that will deal with #1-3. The "estimated assessment" notice that went out last week on the Streetcar Loop Local Improvement District promise property owners that they can use their payment on the Loop as a credit for any OTHER Streetcar assessment that might come up over the next ten years. What this means to me is that any other potential line in SE, going through the Central Eastide Industrial District (CEID), will not be able to use the development potential of the CEID to help with funding. This pretty much kills any streetcars going up Hawthorne, Division, or serving any of our SE neighborhoods for the foreseeable future.

I don't understand. Aren't

I don't understand. Aren't Streetcar LIDs assessed on neighboring properties, the way street local improvement districts work? How could those owners be assessed for more than one Streetcar track? Why would those property owners potentially help pay for the Central Eastside line(s)? Why does this mean Central Eastside urban renewal money wouldn't be able to be used? Sorry, perhaps I'm not firing on all cylinders this Monday morning, having worked the weekend then stayed up too late last night on returning. Please type slowly in explaining.

I don't understand. Aren't

I don't understand. Aren't Streetcar LIDs assessed on neighboring properties, the way street local improvement districts work? Nope. For streets, you pay for the street in front of your house. If you happen to live on a corner, and there's a second assessment for the other street...the rule had been you pay 50%. The streetcar is basically taking in a district. You're next to the streetcar lines...you pay 100%. A block away...50%. Interestingly..."benefit" for the streetcar is being determined by Real Market Value. So if your property is already developed with a Real Market Value of a million bucks, you're gonna be charged $7.70 per thousand of value. Got an empty lot ripe for development, worth 100,000? Assuming both properties are in Zone A, you're going to pay 1/10th what the developed property is paying. Yet this project is being sold as Development-Oriented-Transit. Wouldn't you think undeveloped --or underdeveloped-- properties benefit the most from the Streetcar that is helping enable development? That's not the way the formula works. My point about the other potential streetcar lines...all the potential contributors in the Lloyd District, the Central Eastside Industrial District, around the Convention Center...anyone paying for the "Loop" doesn't have to pay for any other streetcar lines for ten years...i.e. Hawthorne, Belmont, Sandy, Burnside. ALL the properties on, say, Hawthorne that were already assessed for the "loop" that might be able to fund a Hawthorne Streetcar line...nope, sorry, they paid their dues for the "loop" and that new line going out to serve the SE neighborhoods? We're on our own...

Wow. Thank you for the

Wow. Thank you for the information, Frank.

Estimated assessments are

Estimated assessments are just that...estimates. But as it stands right now, some of the estimated costs for the Streetcar Loop: $226,077 Portland School District 32,715 Salvation Army 15,889 Central City Concern 37,891 Housing Authority of Portland 126,621 Holy Rosary Church 36,165 Temple Baptist Church 12,000 Mt Olivet Baptist Church 38,060 Portland Opera 931,055 OMSI 93,427 Goodwill 11,280 Oregon Ballet METRO? $2,511,820. Again, these figures are very tentative, and may include commercial properties owned by non-profits...but these represent a good chunk of change for some of these groups. PDC/City of Portland's on the hook for $320,147. This is all a lot of money...and we're just talking about building the line, not maintaining or running it. In the meantime, my transit stop downtown has neither a shelter nor even a bench. Is it worth it? So we can add congestion (in my opinion) to the Central Eastside Industrial District and forestall other more pressing transit improvements? You gotta wonder what message we're sending...

A friend and I were talking

A friend and I were talking at work today and, y'know, you gotta wonder, too... Maybe we don't want to know? Sometimes things feel so wrong --like you think you're kid's stealing money, or something-- that it's simply easier to not think about it, not know about it, and hang out in that comfort zone we all know as denial.

I was happier before I found

I was happier before I found out how closed the Portland decision-making structure is. But for most people, denial isn't a choice or even a subconscious defence mechanism that kicks in. The state of ignorance is forced upon us. And unless you know the questions to ask, and who to ask them to, most people can't get out of it even if we want to. That's why I think those who want to, need to pool our knowledge, resources, strategies, and ideas, to work together to find out what we don't know we don't know.

I was happier before I found

I was happier before I found out how closed the Portland decision-making structure is. But for most people, denial isn't a choice or even a subconscious defence mechanism that kicks in. The state of ignorance is forced upon us. And unless you know the questions to ask, and who to ask them to, most people can't get out of it even if we want to. That's why I think those who want to, need to pool our knowledge, resources, strategies, and ideas, to work together to find out what we don't know we don't know.

I remember a few years back,

I remember a few years back, I was working on a committee studying the needs of children and families in NW Portland. At one meeting the Director of the West Women's Shelter (a Salvation Army organization providing housing and support for abused women and children) was bemoaning the financial hit the streetcar was taking on her organization. They were cutting services in order to pay their streetcar assessment. Cutting services -- baseline, critical services to desperate women and children in circumstances we all pray we or our loved ones will never find our/themselves in -- And, as she said, it was extra painful because they certainly got NO benefit -- their clients did not generally hop the streetcar to escape... I wasn't surprised, because I'd heard from Frank that this was happening. But others on the committee were -- tied into city government in many ways they all were sure they "knew" that non-profits would be held harmless in the assessment. Hah. People rich enough to buy condo's in the Pearl were exempted from the assessment. Not the struggling social service organizations unlucky enough to be located nearby. That was gross. And a great example of our entire city (including our electeds) turning a deaf ear and eye to what they didn't want to know. I like the streetcar. I think it's fun. I like that we can take our dog on it. But I volunteer for a social service non-profit. Every dime counts. Every dime. And every dime you take from these organizations is real people who are not helped -- in a myriad of ways. Some little old lady in Maplewood gives $25.00 to West Woman's -- and it goes to pay for a streetcar whose primary beneficiaries are developers and high end retail. I don't think that's the highest and best use of her donation.

But then, once we find out

But then, once we find out what we don't know we don't know -- how do we take it outside our "small circle of friends"? That's the real challenge. All around this city there are people who know what we don't know we don't know... (gakk!) But what good is that? Unless we can figure out a way to explain this stuff to the general, er, voting, public -- we've got not a chance in hell of changing anything.

My circle of friends

My circle of friends expanded when I ran, and has grown more since I started this blog. The circle of people who are definitely not in that category grew larger in both processes, too, of course. But we can use this blog as one forum to have lots of people pitch in to help with the questions, answers and explanations. I don't believe there's "a way", Anne. There isn't one way. This system that was not set up for us isn't only the result of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and its amendments or even all the laws made over the years. It grew to what it is over hundreds of years, and will likely take more than our lifetimes to change to a more inclusive, fairer system. We have to work to change it, and to explain what's real and true, in innumerable different ways. But the first step, I think, is recognizing that the battle was not entirely won by the suffragettes and the civil rights leaders of the sixties. Unless the barriers are recognized, people are just surprised when they run into the brick walls, and don't realize that they need a strategy to break them down.