TriMet/Metro Southwest Corridor Planning (Portland to Bridgeport Village)

[zilfondel]

If you are going to make the UGB argument, you should also take a look at the fact that it has prevented jobs sprawl to a certain degree. Sure, places like Wilsonville host a large number of jobs, but employers haven't left the industrial central city districts for green fields out on the fringe.

And if you guys think that 100% of the people who are buying homes in NE Portland are young hipsters who would never consider moving to Hillsboro... you are so woefully misinformed. For one, hipsters aren't buying much of anything, besides 12-packs of PBR. Secondly, there are plenty of hipsters in the suburbs. I work out on the edge of the UGB, and I see fixed-gear bikes being ridden by American-Apparel clad smoking 20-somethings all the damn time.

In fact, many of them tell me how they'd love to move to Alberta or Killingsworth or Mississippi, but they just can't find a job there to be able to afford it.


Inner SE/NE Portland will probably be mostly dominated by established yuppies making that transition from hipster-hood in the next decade, IMO.

[twofiftyfive]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

For one, hipsters aren't buying much of anything, besides 12-packs of PBR.

Very funny, but the people living in inner NE don't have to own their homes for bvpcvm's argument to be correct.

I largely agree with bvpcvm here--the effect of the UGB on people living in close-in neighborhoods is very indirect at best. Maybe urbanites are attracted to Portland simply because the UGB exists (I was), and then they naturally settle close to downtown. But bvpcvm is correct that nobody who prefers the suburbs lives in close-in Portland because of any effect the UGB has had on housing.

Edit to add: Once upon a time this thread was about the possibility of Max to Tigard being a subway. I would love for it to happen. TriMet could justify it because of the topography, and then it would be so popular--due to stations being able to go where people live/work/shop rather than the middle of freaking nowhere--that we could seriously discuss burying other lines.

[NJD]

Why an urban UGB?

Simple: the federally subsidized suburbanization institutions created in 1932 made a consumption based model of building that assumes a limitless supply of land. We do not have a limitless supply of land. The feds continue to offset reality by subsidizing track homes built not by the end user, and artificially deflating the value of farm, forest and natural lands. The biggest lobbyist in DC is the Home Builders Association.

"Lifestyle Centers" are not the answer they are just another auto-oriented, federally subsidized mall that will be half empty and obsolete in 20 years time.

If you think otherwise visit a place without metro-wide planning like the famous shrinking cities of Detroit or Cleveland, check out central Kansas City (especially the very unused and tax break ridden Jumptown developer's Power & Lights District which is seen by locals as a folly, local business killer, and a raping of taxes), check out Atlanta!

However, our UGB is not perfect. Ours does expand when it shouldn't and we see federally subsidized auto-only suburbanization, inequity and elitism within it (for examples the differences between "BeaverTron" and "Lake No-Negro"). Keep in mind it is experimental. Also keep in mind "Vantucky" (local name, not my own) should be in the UGB but is not so it throws the concept slightly out of balance (in my opinion this is a good thing for variety in urban design).

I find it a tragedy that the older cities "have to" hand out tax subsidies to developers to offset the Federal subsidies given to greenfields. Worst of all, no one knows suburbs are very heavily subsidized in the first place.

The world's most "livable" cities are ones that have very strict land-use laws and publicly crafted (planned) new development that supports/ coexists with older development.

EDIT: ^

the effect of the UGB on people living in close-in neighborhoods is very indirect at best.

Go travel and see the rest of the country if you don't believe it effects things like preservation and reinvestment in the inner city.

[NJD]

Lets see here: fund a subway through low density Southwest for... $2 billion more than a surface line? Good luck with Oregon's low tax, bad economy status.

[JoshYent]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Much of what you are wanting to be proven probably wont be seen for another 50 years as Portland metro grows within itself.

Agreed

[MR. Cosmopolitan]

Originally Posted by NJD

"Lake No-Negro"

An important reason for the large scale suburbanisation taking place in the 70's and before could have been racism. Americans could be now living without knowing, inside a society structure designed to keep people of different origins and characters separated. I think we should really reflect about that.

[Shilo Rune 96]

MAX tunnel to Oregon Health and Science University a possibility


Photo courtesy of The Oregonian

Portland, are you ready for another MAX tunnel?

The idea – and let’s be clear, that’s all it is at this point – has surfaced in discussions about extending light rail out Southwest Barbur Boulevard to Tigard and beyond, next in line for the region’s growing light rail system.

The tunnel would serve Oregon Health & Science University, the city’s largest employer, through an underground station similar to the one that serves the Oregon Zoo.

“It might be a speck of dust on somebody’s desk,” said Mary Fetsch, TriMet spokeswoman, but she said any discussion of a specific project is premature.

A decision to build a tunnel – or even to extend light rail to the Southwest, is a long ways off, but officials from the state, Portland, Metro, TriMet, and other cities in a corridor out to Sherwood have launched a mosaic of planning efforts aimed at determining first where the population growth and employment centers should be, and then figuring out the best way to connect them, Portland city planner Tracy Morgan told the Hillsdale Neighborhood Association Wednesday night.

Read the full article here....

[65MAX]

Just an aside...

It's not mentioned in the article, but an OHSU subway station could be deeper than the Washington Park station, and possibly even the deepest in the world if it surpasses 340 feet.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Just an aside...

It's not mentioned in the article, but an OHSU subway station could be deeper than the Washington Park station, and possibly even the deepest in the world if it surpasses 340 feet.

The Washington Park stop is already the second deepest in the world, behind a station in Russia.

[Grantenfuego]

http://www.katu.com/politics/Washing...?tab=video&c=y

Starting to feel like these old-timer automobile lovers will prevent me from ever seeing this line happen in my lifetime. Someone should tell this guy that in three years, when his drivers license is revoked for whatever reason, vision, hearing ect... MAX will be a viable option for him.

[Eco_jt]

yeah, nothing is more upsetting than reading anti-rail comments and watching old farts complain about how they hate light rail. *sigh*

Oh well, maybe their worst fears will come true and politicians will "ram light-rail down their throats" anyways...I might take fancy in that

[eric cantona]

Originally Posted by Grantenfuego

http://www.katu.com/politics/Washing...?tab=video&c=y

Starting to feel like these old-timer automobile lovers will prevent me from ever seeing this line happen in my lifetime. Someone should tell this guy that in three years, when his drivers license is revoked for whatever reason, vision, hearing ect... MAX will be a viable option for him.

typical balanced coverage from our local media. I'm sure it would have been very, very difficult to find an alternate viewpoint to Mr. "get off my lawn" somewhere in the city. assholes.

[Grantenfuego]

It never ends.

The issue of the future of metro-area transportation hit close to home recently - on March 23, four initiative petitions were filed in King City, Tigard, Tualatin and Sherwood that could, if approved, force a public vote on financing any new rail systems through those cities.

http://www.theregalcourier.com/news/...46975391285800

Reynolds said that light rail is too expensive to be feasible. "We can afford it like we can four holes in the head," she said. "The whole premise of light rail is that it promotes a clean environment, and global warming has been debunked, so we don't need it. And it will impact businesses close to the highway because light rail will take up two lanes."

[bvpcvm]

Originally Posted by Some idiot

"and global warming has been debunked"

oh jeebus. sure it has.

[bvpcvm]

i just hope this generation of old narcissistic assholes lives long enough to see that they were wrong.

[65MAX]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

i just hope this generation of old narcissistic assholes lives long enough to see that they were wrong.

Nah, just let them die off as soon as possible. You could show them endless examples of how wrong they are and they'd still refuse to accept the facts. Might as well let them croak now and put them out of their misery.

[RainDog]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Nah, just let them die off as soon as possible. You could show them endless examples of how wrong they are and they'd still refuse to accept the facts. Might as well let them croak now and put them out of their misery.

It's incredibly aggravating. I can't fathom how people can maintain an auto-centric mindset after spending any amount of time in a walkable/bikable/transit oriented area. Why would you choose sprawl and autos over density and transit options?

I moved here from the Sacramento area, where the layout of the city isn't very conducive of transit/biking/walking. I mean the whole city is on a standard grid that is diced up and wedged between two diagonal freeways with a river running through the whole mess . I can't imagine thinking "Oh yes, THIS is how a city should be! Sprawl! Traffic! Strip malls and surface parking! No choice but to drive..."

Bleh.

[bvpcvm]

convenience, or what they imagine to be convenient, trumps everything. give me acres of free parking and get off my lawn!

[Grantenfuego]

This perception is slowly changing and will continue to, for many. Unfortunately, even though I am a young man and will see many positive changes in my lifetime, I will not see the future for transportation that I would like to.

[Grantenfuego]

PS. I really liked the article from the New Yorker. That is the sort of conversation that is needed to change popular attitudes.