Beaverton is the quintessential car-oriented suburb; it would not exist in its current form without the automobile. I don't think you're going to easily walk the cat back on that one, but at least it will be Washington County taxpayers' money the Don will be wasting on trying instead of Portland's for a change.

His ideas range from banning cars from some downtown streets to greatly expanding bus routes instead of only building new light rail and streetcar lines.

One out of three ain't bad! (the bus part)

When i dealt with fregonese during the Southwest Community Plan fiasco back in the 90's he lived on a big spread in West Linn. He was and is shameless about the fact that streetcars and density do not apply to him and his like. just another phony

How about some of these "planner experts" suddenly vanish never to be heard from again? Would anyone - except other urban planning koolaid drinkers - really miss any of them?

Why are these people promoting buses? - they use more energy than many cars. Trimet buses use fuel at the same rate as a 21-26 pg car.

Trimet buses also cost over $0.90 per passenger per mile compared to a car's $0.25.

What’s the point of getting people out of their cars into buses that cost more, use more energy, pollute more and are slower?

see: http://www.portlandfacts.com/top10bus.html

Thanks
JK

"He was and is shameless about the fact that streetcars and density do not apply to him and his like."

This is common among planners. They don't live in transit-oriented bunkers. They live in detached single-family homes. But they all "know" for a fact that "in the future" "people" will "want" to live in "dense livable neighborhoods." They own cars too.

If ever there were a poster child for the sad results of unplanned development, Beaverton is surely it.

Doesn't this low bid consultant contract save $18K? Why is this bad? The savings could be applied to smart Water Meters.

Turns out they pulled a Portland in awarding this waste of space the contract:

http://www.oregonlive.com/beaverton/index.ssf/2010/06/beaverton_contract_for_438749_scheduled_for_vote_without_standard_notice.html

"If ever there were a poster child for the sad results of unplanned development, Beaverton is surely it."

Guess you didn't notice all those miles of high density apartments all over Beaverton. That is what causes traffic congestion - high density without adding road capacity. The vehicle miles jumps up while road capacity stays the same– result gridlock.

Perfectly predictable result of high density - planned or not.

see: http://www.portlandfacts.com/smart/densitycongestion.htm

Thanks
JK

Beaverton... where the residents are fat, dumb, and happy; politicans are fatter and dumber and cannot define happy; and the intelligent are an endangered species...

What a whopping waste of money.

It's amazing that they would pay this and be planning to do on a grand scale what failed so miserably at the Beaverton Round.
And to use the same clowns as Portland?

I'll wager their attempt to use TIF/Urban Renewal will fail.
The voters will be wise to the ponzi scheme and reject it regardless of the sickening campaign put on to dupe them.

If there are any city council members lurking here you beter bone up.

Start here
http://bojack.org/images/urbanrenewalgraph.pdf

Like M, I also experienced Fregonesism during the SW Community Planning Charades...or Charettes. It did blow up, and even in a part of the city that has an abundance of New Urbanism diehards that believe in Planning. When proposals of urban renewal funding meet projects disregarding common sense auto use, Beaverton will have an interesting smack-down.

"If ever there were a poster child for the sad results of unplanned development, Beaverton is surely it"

Yep, I guess that's why Nike and Intel and a lot of high-tech are located out by Beaverton/Hillsboro instead of Portland where everything is planned and wonderful.

It is good that Fregonese can keep his family members "employed" and off the streets. Do they ALL ride their bikes to work or do they telecommute from West Linn?

If ever there were a poster child for the sad results of unplanned development, Beaverton is surely it.

Actually, Beaverton *is* the result of a lot of urban planning activity. So is Gresham.

And that might be the dirty little secret of city planning that nobody wants to admit--urban planners are chiefly responsible for many of the problems they're lobbying to "correct".

Like that almost built Mt. Hood Freeway? City planners largely loved it.

But to be fair, a significant part of the problem is the political decisions and machinations that start the wheels in motion in the first place--and make the weasely, back-slapping decisions that make the city what it is. And that is not a "planning mecca"--that is, unless you're a planner looking for work, or one of those being cranked out of PSU's planning school.

For a brief summary of Beaverton land use planning:

http://www.beavertonoregon.gov/departments/CDD/Codes/comprehensiveplan/vol1/forward.pdf

Notice that the Beaverton City Planning Commission was created in 1944. Most of what developed Beaverton is today happened since then, and especially sinc ethe early 70s, when large-scale, long-range planning began in earnest.

Thanks for the link, ecohuman. I loved #8 on the "Goals of the City of Beaverton" page:

Continually strive for excellence in all private developments and public services within the constraints of economic reality. Economic reality should not be interpreted as maximum profit for minimum investment or as maximum local budgets for maximum services.

A nice little tweak of Portland, methinks . . .

Yep, I guess that's why Nike and Intel and a lot of high-tech are located out by Beaverton/Hillsboro instead of Portland where everything is planned and wonderful.

Intel is here because municipalities bent over and grabbed their ankles to do almost anything they asked, and to sell water as cheaply as possible to them. Fabricating chips is an extremely water-dependent process--you go where the water is cheap.

And Intel's mainly in Hillsboro, not Beaverton.

Nike is *not* in Beaverton--it's in unincorporated Washington County. This embarassing little fact led to Beaverton attempting to annex the area containing Nike; after Phil Knight lobbyed the hell out of the state legislature and no doubt spread lots of cash around, the effort failed.

"If ever there were a poster child for the sad results of unplanned development, Beaverton is surely it"

Actually, what you see is the result of a surfeit of planning, with no common sense. Much like what you see in Portland: We used to have a nice little place on a large lot, with a creek running through the lower part of the back yard. It was quiet, and a veritable wildlife sanctuary. We cared for the property, and were rewarded a huge diversity of wildlife. Ducks, herons, several species of woodpeckers - the list went on.

Then the planners struck. They started with "infill projects". Translation: build more apartments and skinny houses without expanding road infrastructure. In just a few years, our quiet street was filled with cars zipping by at 50. The noise level went up tremendously, and pulling into or out of our driveway became an adventure.

Ah, but the planners weren't done: one day, a three-inch stack of dead trees arrived in our mailbox, through which the City's BES informed us that they had placed an environmental overlay on our property, and through which they outlined their requirements.

We were to remove any non-native plant species within 50 feet of the waterway, or they would do it and bill us for the "service". While I had acquired and planted a number of native species in the area, and removed a large percentage of the blackberries that had been choking the area when we arrived, I found their attitude unacceptable. I was even less impressed when I noticed that, prior to replacing the back deck on our home, the City would require a full set of plans and a nonrefundable fee of $1200.

Upon receipt of plans and fee, their crack team would then decide whether or not replacement would be permitted. Really. We moved to an area that is somewhat less dominated by planners.