Unable to decipher what the point of that post is.

Outer SE doesn't need walk buttons on our traffic lights to make walking safer. We need to curtail the violence to make it a safer place to walk. Also, if outer SE's lights need anything it's better timing. I for one am tired of hitting every light red. Timing the lights to be green if you go the speed limit is a cheap way of increasing capacity and efficiency and it's green.

isfire-may on the url-yay?

So we can expect west Burnside to be much less efficient in the near future?

He signs his posts "Onward, Sam".

From the link referring to the Pearl District Plan: “City planners worked with neighbors and business leaders from the district as well as citizens who bicycle, walk, use transit and deliver goods. Stakeholder feedback supported a multimodal vision for this dense and growing area.”

Dissecting Sammyboy’s statement, the inclusive stakeholders appear to be neighbors in and around the Pearl District, business leaders, and people who bicycle, walk in the neighborhood, use transit and deliver goods in the Pearl District and surrounding areas.

Gee whiz Mr. mayor, it seems like there just might be a group missing here from the stakeholder list. If the aforementioned representation is a complete list of stakeholders, then only those specific stakeholders ought to be the financiers of the Pearl District Plan. Under Sammyboy’s bias and twisted standards, drivers have been discriminately black balled as Pearl stakeholders, and therefore no money should be appropriated from motorist paid gas tax revenues to pay for this project. The latter would be taxation without representation.

Hopefully a new administration will bring some equity to the citizen stakeholder process.

Creepy: I have wrestled with the problem of humanizing Burnside. It’s a dysfunctional, unsafe, high-traffic speedway that moves more than 30,000 vehicles every day.
JK: Quit demonizing people - that 30,000 vehicles are really 48,000 people going to places, making trips that are important to them. (At the national average of 1.6 people per car)

Creepy: These signals should be seen as a down payment on the vision for one of our most significant streets. They’re the first step toward a Burnside corridor that is a safer, calmer gateway to Downtown
JK: “Calmer” usually means slower. Are you saying it is good public policy to slow 48,000 people trying to get somewhere? Can you measure any safety increase from slowing of traffic on this street? There are probably a myriad of safety improvements available that won’t slow traffic and won’t cause 48,000 people to waste their lives a few minutes at a time.

Thanks
JK

Hey Citizens aka Little people:

would anyone have some extra pain medication you would be whiling to share? I hurt my shoulder patting myself on the back for screwing you over so many times since I was elected to the city council in 2004.

Thanks
Sam

I gotta disagree with you, Jack.

On this blog we all keep saying how the purpose of city government is safety, roads, and a few other things. Here he's trying to address roads, and you're unhappy with that too?

I, for one, would LOVE some of pedestrian-activated crosswalks on outer East Glisan. I don't let my middleschoolers walk to school because there are no lights between 102 and 122 and only 1 poorly-marked (and unlit) crosswalk in that stretch, and you take your life in your hands if you try to cross along there.

I know we would all be happiest if Sam decided to resign this afternoon, but that's unlikely to happen. So I'd rather he spend his last days working on synchronizing stop lights and planning crosswalks instead of coming up with ways to implement the Garbage Police.

A quick summation: "Some buddy of mine got upset that he jaywalked on Burnside and was nearly hit by a driver who didn't understand his place in the Portland biosphere. After all, we know that drivers are expected to violate the law of inertia and come to an immediate stop whenever a pwecious snowflake hipster is involved. Since my crack team of sycophants finally admitted, after years of research, that the law of inertia can't be changed via legislation, I'll just settle for confronting anybody stupid enough to drive in My City without permission and Make. Them. PAY."

So Powell Blvd, once planned to be a 8+ lane freeway, gets 3 lanes for traffic and the remaining space turned into a bike-park type thingy? I wonder if Portland's "planners" have ever made a trip out here and realized that HARDLY ANYONE BICYCLES. As it stands, we have plenty of open bike lanes and traffic jams that last all day.

We need more capacity for cars. Period.

There's that "multi-modal" phrase again.
SO tiresome! God forbid that anyone ever go any place in a car in Portlandia.
Unfortunately Sammy's replacement isn't going to be any different.

any of your Outer Powell residents who think you are just going to get a few button controlled cross walks from Mayor Sam are in for a huge disappointment.
Observe how he and his minions have run roughshod over other areas as they "improve" them.

(Sarcasm mode on)

Anthony, Anthony, Anthony -

Its our fault HARDLY ANYONE BICYCLES. We just haven't spent enough tax dollars making biking attractive enough.

But once we build this bright shiny new, EVERYONE WILL BICYCLE.

Really.

Have I ever lied to you?

Sam

(Sarcasm mode off)

What's up with the "I saw Sam" Flickr feed linked on that page? Is it supposed to be like a celebrity sighting or something? Or more like Sasquatch?

On the positive side, the "Google Translate" options on the top right of Sam's letter provide absolute minutes of entertainment! You can even brush up on you Macedonian!

Snards, the final “ Sam Salutation” can’t get here fast enough. “Over and Out. Sam”

Michelle,
I know that long stretch from 102 to 122 on Glisan.
There is no adequate way to cross that street, it is so obvious
that it ought to be a priority.
In my view, crosswalks are needed.
As for sidewalks on side residential streets, easy to ask for, but need to to be aware of who pays and how much, as each household would be paying thousands of dollars, so it is up the those who would be paying. I am afraid it isn't that simple, as for some this would be a huge financial burden, in addition to that sewer cost burden. They may have to move or sell cheap to leave. Maybe the developers would like that, more than one way to get rid of those single family homes and lots and onward to more "redo."

Clinamen, I think you've got it right. This area is being targeted next for the "silent squeeze" to end life as the current residents know it.

Mr. Grumpy,
There has been much focus from the city on this east area, such as the East Portland Action Plan. My thought was that city knew they made a mess of things, so had to do something so that they could justify going onward with more, but then I have lost trust. From what I hear there are many meetings on this for citizens to participate, that was after the committee meetings.

Remember the primary, Brady, Hales and Smith all talking about their concern, priority for the area? That is pretty telling, especially with Hales. He was part of the problem in the first place, all in charge of rezoning and changing the character of the area.

Don't get me started on the damage Katz/Hales policies did.

I know how nice the area used to be. I know people who still live in the area, that are disgusted and talking about leaving.

I hate Sam as much as the next guy, but honestly Powell (east of I-205) that has a severe identity crisis that is long overdue.

Officially, Powell is U.S. 26 and as such as a state maintained highway. However, it's been largely ignored and remains looking like a rural two lane state highway - lacking sidewalks, drainage...all of the amenities expected from an urban highway. Even ODOT admitted as such - until a few years ago, signs on I-205 actually told drivers to use Division (which is a city street) for U.S. 26 eastbound. There was even a sign on Powell itself advising motorists wishing to stay on 26 to cut over to Division at I-205 and use it to Gresham and rejoin the "real" U.S. 26. Today, the signs have changed, but motorists going to "Gresham" are still pointed to Division - Powell is simply referred to as U.S. 26 with no real destination.

That begs the question - who then is responsible for 26? Should the city be responsible; and if so should the city take jurisdiction over (as Portland has for Sandy Boulevard/former Business U.S. 30, Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway/former Oregon 10, Interstate Avenue/former Oregon 99W, and M.L.K. Jr. Boulevard/former Oregon 99E)? Or should ODOT remain responsible, as ODOT continues to have jurisdiction of 26 from Naito Parkway and over the Ross Island Bridge? Gresham, on the other hand, took jurisdiction over from Portland city limits to the start of the Mt. Hood Highway expressway portion on the east side of Gresham.

And then...what changes should be made? Should Powell be reduced in importance? Or made into an expressway? Should it relieve Division; or should Division relieve Powell? Gresham's portion of Powell is largely an improved three-lane street; should that form follow Powell out to I-205? Or should it be five lanes like all of the other west-east arterials?

Should the Powell neighborhood be remade into something else? If so - who should lead on that? What about current residents - does City Hall even know or care what the local residents think; they have a long track record of distancing themselves from anyone east of 82nd so who thinks City Hall will actually listen now?

Eric H.
As far as highway use and transportation, that is your area of knowledge.

Should the Powell neighborhood be remade into something else?

Unfortunately, much has already been remade into something else, a real eye opener to anyone who can make a drive on 122nd Ave through that Powell neighborhood. I don't see this remaking, a result of city policies as positive. I wonder how many groves of Firs and Cedars had to be removed for housing developments, some looking like ghetto housing. But Portland is into green and sustainable, right?