home
Advertise on BikePortland

Live from City Council: Potter present for Sauvie Bridge Span re-use vote

Posted by on April 2nd, 2008 at 8:56 am

[Read updates at bottom of story.]

Mayor Potter, who was supposed to be tied up all this week in the labor arbitration hearing of a police lieutenant he fired, has decided to show up at the City Council meeting this morning.

Besides perhaps wanting to be present at the last City Council meeting of Commissioner Erik Sten, Potter is also present to read his memo on the Flanders Street/Sauvie Island Bridge Re-use plan.

The significance of Potter’s attendance is that simply by showing up, he guarantees the plan will be stopped. He knows that Adams needs unanimous council approval (because this is presented as an emergency declaration).

Potter’s presence will make even clearer his concerns and questioning of the plan, which his political rival Commissioner Adams supports. As the Oregonian pointed out yesterday, the political backstory of Potter’s position on the bridge cannot be overstated.

All Council members are present for this morning’s vote. On the table is whether or not to authorize the City of Portland Office of Transportation (PDOT) to enter into a contract with Kuney Construction to re-use the Sauvie Island Bridge span for a bike and pedestrian crossing over I-405 at NW Flanders Street.

Commissioner Adams, who has brought the issue to Council as an emergency declaration, will have to secure four of all five council votes in order for the Sauvie Island Bridge re-use plan to survive another day.

At this point, Commissioner Saltzman holds the deciding vote is the other unknown (Leonard and Sten have said they support the plan). According to sources at City Hall, Saltzman had questions about the the technical details of the plan and was in communication with Adams’ staff about them yesterday.

At stake with this vote is the future of the Flanders Street Bicycle Boulevard.

With funding (in part) from the River District urban renewal area and from transportation system develop charges levied against Pearl District businesses and residents, the Sauvie Island Span re-use plan would bring a bike and ped crossing twice as wide as a standard concrete structure.

New 10-foot bike lane on SE Madison-7
This bike lane on SE Madison Ave. is 10 feet wide.
A newly constructed Flanders St. bridge would
likely be just five feet wider. The Sauvie Island Bridge
span is 30 feet wide.
(Photo © J. Maus)

This importance of this width should not be overlooked. 15 feet — which is the likely width of a new bridge if/when it is built — would simply be too narrow to accommodate what is likely to be a very popular, bi-direction, bicycle and pedestrian street.

To give some perspective on width, consider that the widest bike lane in the city — the approach to the Hawthorne Bridge just west of SE Grand Ave. — is 10 feet wide. During the morning commute, there is already congestion in that 10 feet. Now, add pedestrian traffic and another direction of bike traffic and you see why a 15 foot bridge will not be adequate.

Initial estimates show that re-using the Sauvie Island Bridge span would cost $1.5 million more than building a new structure (with $500,000 of that falling on the shoulders of private fundraising), but funds that have materialized for re-using the Sauvie span would likely not be available for a new span.

Also, if the plan can move forward, it would provide exciting momentum for the City to begin development of the Flanders Bike Boulevard.

Former Portland Mayor Bud Clark showed up to voice his support. Behind him are Catherine Ciarlo and Patricia Gardner
(Photo © J. Maus)

The vote should take place in the next hour or so. I will update this post throughout the morning. Stay tuned…


(10:54 – The item is now being discussed.)

Commissioner Adams’ testimony (the following is not his exact testimony, but the best I could do to type as he spoke).

Why this project? I have prioritized safety in transportation projects. This project is in keeping with those priorities. It is also very similar to my effort, and council’s approval of $11 million for transportation safety projects out in East Portland. This is also responsive to public opinion research we’ve conducted recently that say we need to remove more of hte conflict between bikes and cars. That’s how we can up with our proposal to increase our bike boulevards to 110 miles. Portlanders are also spending more and more of their budgets on transportation costs. Speaking to the benefits of mor

One of most sustainable transportation proposals in the history of Portland — seeking to re-use a piece of Portland history. We’ve learned that re-use and recycling, when you look at the total benefits are well worth the effort and are in keeping with Portland’s values.

This project is cost-effective. The $3.5 million dollar place-holder amount [for building a new bridge] is a low-confidence estimate, whereas the $5.5 million for re-use of the Sauvie Bridge is a high-confidence estimate based on ODOT research.

The money, except for $500,000 for general transportation revenues, cannot be used for basic maintenance and other projects.

This is a long overdue project, the Flanders Street Bike Boulevard project has been on the books for a long time.

If you want to see the basic, brutalist style of bike/ped crossings, just come to my neighborhood, you’ll see the Failing Street Crossing, the Bryant Street Crossing, they’re not used.

This would also give Portland more emergency preparedness with better access for emergency vehicles if/when necessary.

Now a presentation is being given about the history of the Flanders Bike Boulevard by Bill Hoffman, Project Manager, and David O’Longaigh, Supervising Engineer with the Portland Office of Transportation.
(11:04)

– They say the Bridge is in good condition and it was last inspected in August of 2007. No cracks were found, just some paint peeling.
– The plan would include a bike/ped only signal on NW 16th to make sure they get across safely.
– “Almost like a glass slipper,” the bridge fits perfectly in that location.
– Timing is critical to re-use this old bridge span.
– They have done a feasibility study and have found that they can relocate the bridge without problems.
– Funding sources: Transp. System Dev. Charges – $2 million; PDC Tax Inc. Financing (River District) $2 million, Federal Transportation Enhancements – $1 million, Safe, Sound and Green Streets – $500,000, Private Fundraising.

(11:09)
Roger Geller, PDOT Bike Coordinator:
-Bike counts in NW Portland are surprisingly low. A problem we have in NW is that we have very poor access between NW and the central city right now.
– The freeway is a significant barrier. We have crossings but they’re only good for the strongest, most fit cyclists. They’re not suitable for the kind of cyclists we want to encourage (the average citizen, not just the person who self-identifies as a cyclist).
– We think Flanders Street will be a primary conduit. Because this is going to be a nice, family friendly route…we see this
– We have a lot of 15 foot wide paths already — like the Springwater and they’ve been undersized almost since the day they were opened. They’re just too small, I get complaints in my office about them all the time.
– On the South Waterfront, for example, we’re going with a 30 foot wide pathway corridor, with separated facilities for bikes and pedestrians.

(11:13)

Former mayor Bud Clark, Catherine Ciarlo (former BTA exec. dir.), and Patricia Gardner, NW neighborhood activist are now testifying.

Bud Clark – The bridge has my vote. This discussion has brought people from both sides of the freeway together.

Catherine Ciarlo – (Note: Ciarlo was in charge of the BTA, and on the stakeholder advisory committee, when the decision was made to give bikes Flanders as part of the Burnside/Couch couplet project back in 2002)

What excites me is the opportunity we have is to really create a place in Portland, and to capitalize on the name our city has made.. this would be a way to continue that. And to do it in a way that is cost-effective. If we end up spending $1 million more, in my opinion is $1 million extremely well spent — not just for transportation but for the identity of our City.

Patricia Gardner (Planning Chair for NW District of Neighborhoods) – Tells the story of a friend who was trying to cross Everett on her bike and was hit, falling over the side of the railing.

We’ve needed to do something about this for over a decade. I guess the word is “kismet” or “fate”.. When Sauvie Island bridge became available and it fit at that location, it was a galvanizing moment. We’ve been working with the PDC on this for years. This is about connection — there’s not safe, great connections until you get to NW Johnson… to have, finally a safe connection would mean so much to our community and to our city.

One of the things that has captured so many people’s imagination is the symbolism of this span. The excitement of that story is creating so much excitement in the neighborhood…. I would really beseech you to go for it!, it’s worth it. We have developers lined up to write checks, they’re just waiting for it to be real.

(11:26)
Susan Kubota, the aunt of Tracey Sparling (who was killed at SW Burnside and 14th in October) is due to testify in a few minutes.

(11:36)
Reuel Fish, representing the Pearl District Business Association and principal owner of Urban Wineworks (which is at the foot of the bridge)

There has been comment about the cost of this project. I think in this case, over other alternatives, you get something right way, as a stimulus for economic activity that will happen soon.

We’re ready to go out and pound on doors to raise money for this.

Public safety – You cannot walk on that six-foot sidewalk trying to cross Everett without someone stepping into the street when they’re two abreast… it’s just not safe.

We talk about re-use, instead of being a throw-away society, let’s re-use. Let’s re-connect the barrier that I-405 represents. Let’s put the bicycles and pedestrians on a different thoroughfare.

Chown Hardware and Rogue Brewery have already agreed to put up $15,000 as seed money for this, and all we need is your vote to move forward.


Susan Kubota “Reluctant traffic safety advocate”

I wish I could turn back the clock. If I could go back in time to 2006 when this project was first envisioned, my family would have happily given the city $500,000 if you could have guaranteed that my niece Tracey would still be alive today. If that bridge had been in place, Tracey may not have been riding her bike down 14th street. If a bike box was at 14th and Burnside, she may not have been killed by a cement truck five months ago.

I cannot bring Tracey back, but I can try and prevent this nightmare from happening to other families like ours.

No new taxes will be required for this project. Exponentially greater numbers of pedestrians and cyclists will be protected by this bridge, than by just a standard-width bridge. Many of Tracey’s friends and co-workers could take advantage of a bridge like this. Traffic flow would improve on Glisan and Everett with less bike and ped traffic on this streets. This would solidify the green reputation of this city and this state.

Tracey loved Portland, let’s continue to make it a city to love.

(11:40 – Scott Bricker and Jay Graves are up next)

Bricker:

The BTA has supported this project for many years for reasons that we’ve already heard today. The BTA has recognized that our primary strategy to increase the numbers of bicyclists is to have more low-traffic, safe streets. There is no safe crossing I can take my step-daughter on from Burnside to Johnson. There is a vision for having NW Portland be one of the best bicycle districts in the nation…the opportunities are huge.

With this project, people from around Portland will be able to safely access the entirety of NW Portland. The issue of cost…a number of years ago the Portland City Council had to vote on whether to fund a floating walkway, the Eastbank Esplanade… and today, that project is not only at capacity, it is a signature project for our city. That $30+ million project has absolutely panned out for our city. This project has the same potential.

It is worth the extra $2 million dollars. This is a visionary project that has the whole community excited, perhaps with bold leadership today there’s an opportunity to build this project…the window of opportunity for this is closing fast. I hope you all vote yes today.

Jay Graves (owner of 5 Bike Gallery stores, 130 employees)

I didn’t plan on testifying today, until I read in the paper that 15 feet was an option and I though, don’t make a mistake. If you’d ridden the Hawthorne Bridge before the BTA got the sidewalks widened, you’d understand what I’m talking about. The city has seen a 64% increase in bike commuters in just the last three years alone.

Having lost a co-working to a cycling death last year [Brett Jarolimek] I urge you to give us a safe place to ride our bikes. If that 15 foot bridge gets crowded, cyclists are going to head over to Everett and Glisan and they are dangerous. Give us safe places to ride and let us continue to make Portland proud.

(11:48) – So far, we’ve heard numerous testimony for re-using the Sauvie Bridge and no testimony against the plan…

Chris Smith

There is tremendous right-hook danger on Everett and Glisan…I really think this is one of those defining moments for Portland. This is a decision on whether we will walk the walk on sustainability, but more importantly whether we will build good bike and ped facilities, or great facilities. Whenever we’ve decided to build great facilities we have seen throngs of people use them. –[Smith supports the Sauvie re-use plan.]


The owner of a youth hostel on NW 18th:

Hundreds of our young customers, backpackers, tourists, etc… will make their way across this bridge. They will face daunting crossings, if they are not fully alert, or aware of U.S. traffic patterns, they might find their way in harm’s way. This project must go through. My hostel is pledgling $2,000 for the fundraising effort. Please support this project and continue the quality of life in Portland.

John Reinhold, SE Portland resident.

I’m hear to voice my support for the re-use of the Sauvie Island bridge. What I want to bring to the table is to mention that Portland is becoming known nationally as an epicenter of sustainability. I know this because I travel around the country and I meet people that say, ‘I love Portland, I can walk around, etc…’. I know two people that are traveling to Portland this summer on a bicycle vacation.

Economically this makes very good sense for Portland. It could end up on postcards, etc… I would like to impress up Council that as a City that has become nationally know that we think long-term about the choices we make…

Jeanne Harrison, Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

The WPC is very supportive of re-using the Sauvie Island Bridge. We think it would be much safer than a 15-foot span. I’ve been on a canopy walk in Peru, and let me tell you, crossing the freeway at Everett or Glisan is much scarier.

I bike, but I don’t bike downtown because I can’t get out of my neighborhood because it’s not safe enough…I think this would make a huge difference. Please support this. Thank you.

(11:58 – Karl Rohde, BTA Government and Public Affairs is up next)

Karl Rohde

I am here not only in my role for the BTA, but also as a native of the Portland region and as a resident of the Pearl District. I was around when the Fremont Bridge was raised. A lot of people said, we don’t want another Marquam Bridge. No one is taking pictures of the Marquam Bridge.

We decided the best use of the old Oregon Hotel was not as a parking lot, but as Portland’s living room [it’s now Pioneer Courthouse Square].

[He gives several examples of decisions Portland leaders have made to do something great instead of the cheapest option.]

Even in times of far greater financial crisis than we’re at today, bold leaders have been able to look at the long-term.

(12:03 – the last two to give public testimony are up now and then the vote will come)

One woman speaking in support of the bridge has brought a $100 check and asks council, “I just need to know who to make it out to.”

After all the public testimony (I estimate about 20 or so people at least), 100% of it was in support of re-using the Sauvie span. Has it been enough to sway Commissioner Saltzman? Will Potter still decide to vote against the re-use plan? That remains to be seen…

(12:10pm – Time to vote!)
Adams votes Yes.

Leonard votes Yes.

“The issue isn’t about whether or not we need a bridge, the issue is what kind of a bridge do we want. I believe this city, in the ’50s and the ’60s made huge errors by not recognizing some of the iconic structures were lost forever…and that’s a mistake we can never make again. This project means we connect ourselves to our history. concerns about the cost are appropriate…that’s part of our due dilligence. But I also think in that debate is to consider what we’re getting with that extra cost. I think what we’re getting…you have a project that inspires people, you have people pulling out there checkbooks, that just doesn’t happen with projects in Portland. I think for a variety of reasons this is the right thing for Portland to do. I never had a moment of doubt.”

Saltzman votes No.

I think the Sauvie Bridge would be iconic, but I also know that if we do it under this contract it would also be iconic in another way. He is concerned about the sole-source contract. The last position I want to be in is having a contractor thinking they’ve got us over the barrel. He wants to “test the market”. Recommends that PDOT and Adams enter into discussions with Kuney to purchase the bridge. Go back to Kuney and let them know we’re not prepared to enter into this contract. Then let’s put the job out to bid.


Sten votes Yes.

I was conflicted about this. The need is obvious. I’m with Saltzman that this holds some risk. Refers to people saying the Tram was also said to be a postcard. Saltzman’s concerns are valid. I think it will cost a little bit more, but as in the case in every product, but I think if we pay more for this, we’ll get what we pay for. .. This is an opportunity we have to take. There are risks, but I’m confident that Adams can manage the risks.

Potter is up now. He votes no.

This is about how we prioritize spending in the City of Portland. I think this as a priority for the city doesn’t raise to my level as a $5.5 million or $7 million…especially when I can see building more sidewalks for children to walk to school. I’d rather invest that money in sidewalks, paving streets…etc..throughout our entire city.

Adams now moves to remove the emergency clause (which would mean he only needs a majority, not the unanimous support an emergency clause requires).

City Attorney says one of the dissenters (either Saltzman or Potter) would have to move to amend the motion at this point.

Silence falls. Neither one makes the motion. The bridge re-use plan is seemingly dead at this point.

Email This Post Email This Post

NOTE: At BikePortland, we love your comments. We love them so much that we devote many hours every week to read them and make sure they are productive, inclusive, and supportive (heck, sometimes we even fix your typos!). That doesn't mean you can't disagree with someone. It means you must do it with tact and respect. This is our business and we do not tolerate mean commenters who add nothing of value to the discussion.

Unfortunately, we are not robots and we don't always catch everything. You can help by notifying us if you see inappropriate comments. Thanks! — Jonathan and Michael

Comments
  • steve April 2, 2008 at 9:23 am

    \”15 feet — which is the likely width of a new bridge if/when it is built — would simply be too narrow to accommodate what is likely to be a very popular, bi-direction, bicycle and pedestrian street.\”

    Why would it \’simply\’ be too narrow? You also omitted the cost comparison of the two proposals. You also conveniently omit the numerous uses for the 2 million or so extra dollars this plan will cost.

    I like the idea of re-using this bridge. But please, try and give us all the information. This article is about as subtle as a lead brick!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Jonathan Maus (Editor) April 2, 2008 at 9:31 am

    \”I like the idea of re-using this bridge. But please, try and give us all the information. This article is about as subtle as a lead brick!\”

    Thanks for your subtle feedback Steve. I\’ve added some of the funding information.

    As for width, to give some perspective, the widest bike lane in the city is the 10-foot wide double-bike lane on the approach to the Hawthorne Bridge from SE Grand ave.

    So, I don\’t think an extra 5 feet would do an adequate job for bike and foot traffic in TWO directions.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Laird April 2, 2008 at 9:40 am

    How wide is the springwater trail bridge over 99E?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • steve April 2, 2008 at 9:43 am

    Anytime Jonathan.

    Sometimes it is tricky keeping track of the issues that you refuse to offer opinion on, compared to the issues where your opinion has free reign.

    Has Sam got ya on his payroll yet?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • John Reinhold April 2, 2008 at 9:47 am

    I have noticed many bike supporters around in the gallery. Although I do know that the items location fairly far down the agenda has caused a couple supporters to leave and return to their jobs.

    But as a resident of the southeast Portland neighborhood of Brooklyn, I use the bike/ped bridge at 9th over Powell, almost every day.

    It is I believe 8 feet wide, and is not really sufficient for even one bike and one pedestrian to pass side by side easily.

    Width is very important, and this bridge needs to be at least as wide as two sidewalks and two bike lanes. We get that and more by reusing the old bridge. We don\’t get that with a new bridge.

    Also, the mor \”iconic\” bike and ped facilities we provide, the better our new bike economy will do. The old bridge will be something tourists photograph. It will end up on post cards and in calendars. That type of stuff is valuable.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Moo April 2, 2008 at 10:09 am

    Something else forgotten in all this is the time needed and actual cost to de-commission and recycle the bridge- instead of re-using it. I heard the profit from the steel \”might\” cover the cost…Hmmmm! And on the other hand, what bike shop would be opposed to helping out with some bridge fundraisers?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • jonno April 2, 2008 at 10:11 am

    Cycling, driving, walking, transit-riding NW Portlander here.

    I\’m very much in favor of the Sauvie bridge solution despite the extra cost (to which I plan to contribute). A functional concrete bridge would be a nod to improved facilities, but the Sauvie bridge is so much more than just a span. It\’s a symbol of local values in a highly visible location. To quibble about a relatively small extra cost in this case seems so petty. And the Everett/Glisan couplet is very bike-unfriendly — I am nearly creamed at 16th and Glisan by careless right-turners every time I ride through there. Let\’s not talk about riding up Glisan street — try it sometime in the evening rush hour. I also walk to the Pearl and downtown frequently — there is no friendly way to cross 405 north of Burnside, not one. Narrow sidewalks (and only on one side of each bridge), fast traffic, oblivious drivers everywhere. The Davis crossing requires you to run across a freeway freakin\’ on-ramp with no signal! Ever walked under the looming slab of the Fremont bridge approach? It sucks!

    NW/Pearl/downtown are Portland\’s densest, most walkable and most theoretically bikeable neighborhoods. It\’s time to provide a meaningful facility to link it all together, and a sad, narrow slab of concrete is a penny-pinching cop-out.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • DJ Hurricane April 2, 2008 at 10:14 am

    Well-put jonno.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Austin Ramsland April 2, 2008 at 10:20 am

    \”Former mayor Bud Clark, Catherine Ciarlo (former BTA exec. dir.), and Patricia Gardner, NW neighborhood activist are now testifying.\”

    Hell ya! Keep it coming Jonathan!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Zaphod April 2, 2008 at 10:20 am

    steve, no need to make personal attacks.

    If I were to agree with a politician who advocated for cyclists needs would I then get accused of being on his payroll?

    I occasionally bike across the Failing overpass or the one on Bryant and re-remember why I hate it. It\’s narrow, noisy, often full of trash and broken glass. It feels like a place where I might get mugged as I\’ve surely passed some tweakers and the like on it.

    This bridge would be an amazing addition to our city for a bargain.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Mark P. April 2, 2008 at 10:41 am

    Great updates Jonathan, you\’ve got me on the edge of my seat here. Keep up the good work.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Scott Mizée April 2, 2008 at 10:41 am

    Wow! Excellent Live Reporting! You ROCK JONATHAN!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • John Reinhold April 2, 2008 at 10:47 am

    Half the entertainment is watching Jonathon typing madly, juggling camera and power adapters.

    I don\’t know how he is keeping up.

    Good thing we have Wi-fi here. :)

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • brennen April 2, 2008 at 10:48 am

    I agree with Scott. This is great reporting. Thanks for letting us be a part of the discussion in real time.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • zuckerdog April 2, 2008 at 10:50 am

    I second Scott M.
    I\’m stuck in the office, but feel like I\’m at City Hall

    Great work Jonathon

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • steve April 2, 2008 at 10:58 am

    These updates are indeed awesome. Thanks, Jonathan.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • vic April 2, 2008 at 10:59 am

    I am so glad to be able to follow along! I came down at 10:00 but since I was taking time off from work I could not stay for the testimony that didn\’t start until almost 11:00. I am proud to be represented by all the speakers who have presented so far. I think the recycled bridge would be a wonderful addition to Portland\’s bikescape.

    Thank you Jonathan!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Mmann April 2, 2008 at 11:09 am

    The testimony changed my mind. I hope it changes the vote of at least one person making the decision.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Elliot April 2, 2008 at 11:12 am

    Has Sam got ya on his payroll yet?

    Steve, you\’ve got it turned around the wrong way.

    Sam is on our payroll. He\’s an elected representative, and unlike Potter, he\’s taking a proactive approach to the issues that we need addressed in this city.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Jeremy April 2, 2008 at 11:13 am

    I have never sat at my desk and hit refresh so many times. Thanks Johnathon for making this the best bike site ever.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Jessica Roberts April 2, 2008 at 11:16 am

    OMG, the suspense is killing me! This is so exciting! Thanks for the fantastic live coverage!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Mike April 2, 2008 at 11:25 am

    @ Elliot #19,

    These issues aren\’t just localized to our city, but our whole planet. I hear about magazines/publications rating Portland as \”one of the best places to live in…\” pretty frequently, so maybe if Portland did show that reuse can be cheaper in the long run more cities would adopt Portland approaches to problems.

    Also, we hear initial cost estimates on construction projects all the time and how many times are they right on the money? Usually they go over budget at least a bit and in this case, a bit is pretty close to a million dollars.

    Jonathon, did anyone speak up against the proposal except for Potter?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Jessica Roberts April 2, 2008 at 11:26 am

    Oh, how disappointing. Now I\’m depressed.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Alison April 2, 2008 at 11:27 am

    Jonathan, thank you.

    I have also been on the edge of my seat. I am disappointed in the outcome and am surprised, considering the support.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Zaphod April 2, 2008 at 11:34 am

    With quite compelling public testimony 100% behind this proposal and not one against, I find it frustrating that Potter and Saltzman can vote against it?

    Thanks for the play-by-play… was really awesome.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Grimm April 2, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Wow. How disappointing.

    Read the whole thing right before the vote, refreshed and I can hardly believe they decided to vote against it after those testimonies.

    I guess this is why we have publicly elected officials, so we can get rid of them.

    I can understand this is not the absolute best timing for a ped bridge. But the best opportunities come often at the most inopportune time. You have to learn to buck up and do what will be good in the long haul. Now at best we get an ugly cement piece of modernist garbage that will be at capacity in no time.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • bjorn April 2, 2008 at 11:35 am

    So where do we go from here? Is the timetable set by ODOT? Could they give the Kuney Construction extra time which might allow the city to find another way to fund the bridge? Could Kuney Construction decide to wait longer for the city?

    Bjorn

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • wyatt April 2, 2008 at 11:36 am

    the mcloughlin ped bridge is 15.5\’ wide.

    ftp://ftp.wsdot.wa.gov/public/Bridge/WBES2007/assets/monday/3B/Gary_Rayor_3B.pdf

    is that not wide enough?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • PdxMark April 2, 2008 at 11:37 am

    When do we retire Dan Saltzman?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Steve (not steve!!) April 2, 2008 at 11:41 am

    Oh Crap, what a lack of intestinal fortitude by Saltzman (can we rename the road please), I expected as much by Potter (lame duck SOB), day ruined.
    Win Sam Win !!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Josh April 2, 2008 at 11:46 am

    steve, why always the personal attacks on Jonathan? It never seems to help. If you want to see something he doesn\’t cover you could always ask nicely … he seems to be pretty acomidating. If you just don\’t like his journalism go somewhere else. And if you want to comment on my spelling or grammar go right ahead. Cause I don\’t care.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • bjorn April 2, 2008 at 11:49 am

    #27 do you really think the bike/ped traffic will be comparable on the two bridges? I was pretty amazed the first time I rode over the hawthorne at rush hour, 10 ft in one direction barely cuts it for bikes there.

    Bjorn

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Grimm April 2, 2008 at 11:53 am

    Wyatt, on that ped bridge 15.5 is very suitable. You can fit maybe 4 peds across or 3 cyclists across safely. Its also in a far less dense of an area than NW 14th and Flanders.

    It was said very well on the Portland Architecture blog:
    \”I mean, a long ugly concrete slab in the central city, to save a million and a half? That\’s like choosing a kiddie burger over a Big Mac to save a nickel.\”

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Ian Clemons April 2, 2008 at 11:54 am

    This was really worth fighting for, for all the reasons mentioned above. I\’m proud of Sam and our awesome bike lobby for taking this on. It was an honorable charge up a hill with entrenched defences and I really appreciate them taking this on.

    We need to move to a city built around walking and biking. This defeat will only pave the way for more victories in the future!

    -Ian Clemons

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Joshua Cohen April 2, 2008 at 11:58 am

    I was at the hearing, and while I support the re-use of Sauvie Island bridge, I also think Saltzman is justified in voting no on the sole-source contract.

    I first heard about this project in May 2006. I was excited about it then, and am still excited about it today. But with two years to plan, the best Sam Adams and other project leaders could do is an emergency ordinance for a sole source contract?

    It is my sincere hope that folks go back to the drawing board and figure out a way to make this happen. If both Kuney and they City really want to do this, they should be able to figure out a way to go through an organized procurement.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dag April 2, 2008 at 12:08 pm

    Does this really mean the effort is dead? Saltzman\’s comments seem to indicate that he\’d support the proposal if it wasn\’t a no-bid contract.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • steve April 2, 2008 at 12:08 pm

    Bummer.

    This is a prime example of why folks should give a little more thought before throwing their weight behind Sam for mayor.

    The two dissenters both mentioned the Tram cost over-runs. One supporter even acknowledged it. It is certainly a debateable position that Sam Adams and his history of ineptitude cost us this bridge.

    What is that line Dubya bumbled?

    \’Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.\”

    Perhaps we should be finding a less polarizing candidate to back? I am certainly NOT referring to Sho.

    Randy Leonard would get my vote, but he also seems to piss a lot of people off. Will we ever get a Mayor who is not a lame duck? I suppose being rid of Potter will help. I am so sick of him and Sam squabbling.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Kris April 2, 2008 at 12:11 pm

    That\’s rather dissapointing, after all the very compelling testimonials, but it sounds like there is enough of energy and vision to make Flanders Bike Boulevard happen, hopefully with a wider bridge than the 15\’ they had planned.

    Flanders Bike Blvd… come to think about, I\’ll have something real cool to brag about with my homies back in Belgium!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Jonathan Maus (Editor) April 2, 2008 at 12:12 pm

    \”Does this really mean the effort is dead?\”

    There is still some hope. I\’ve just posted a new story that gives more details.

    Read it here.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Josh April 2, 2008 at 12:19 pm

    ohh and I am also sad about this decision

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • politically anonymous April 2, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    It appears that Mayor Potter also does not fully understand transportation funding.

    Or at least maybe he understands it but he counts on the general public not understanding it when he makes public statements…

    Several of the funding sources for the bridge cannot simply be used to pave streets and sidewalks in other areas of Portland.

    Transportation and development funds are usually very specifically tied to specific projects, districts, or uses.

    And when he used the old favorite of \”children need sidewalks and roads to get to school\” argument – speaking about the unpaved areas in some other parts of Portland – he completely ignores the fact that within a few blocks of this proposed crossing there are several schools, parks, and busy attractions for children and families.

    Nothing is as simple as a sound-byte can make it out to be.

    Not re-using the Sauvie Island bridge is not going to get a single new sidewalk or street paved in other Portland neighborhoods. I guarantee it.

    I am seriously regretting my \”Tom Potter\” yard sign, and my vote I gave him a few years ago.

    And as for the \”sole source\” contract, there are often many very good reasons to sole source a contract. As it is the city may very well end up wasting more money in manpower, resources, and actual $$$ trying to put together and evaluate the bids than they will save. The simple fact that Kuney owns the bridge, and are the ones taking it down is a very powerful argument in favor of sole sourcing. What if we move forward with \”buying\” it from Kuney and then the bids come in more expensive – plus what we already spent to buy the thing?

    Oh well, we win some and we lose some.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • zilfondel April 2, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    I\’ve said it before, and I\’ll say it again – 15 feet just isn\’t wide enough for a bike bridge! Go ride the existing ugly and poorly designed ped-freeway bridges to get an idea of how bad they are.

    30\’ isn\’t that wide even – it is only the width of two standard Ford Explorers parked end-to-end (each one is about 14 1/2\’ long). I would also point out that this isn\’t about building a park in the sky, but the width will be necessary to accommodate the throughput comfortably.

    A whopping $2 million for a bike and ped bridge – when the Sauvie Bridge will cost over $400 million, a new Columbia River Bridge will cost around $4 billion – the Flanders bridge reuse cost would be 1/1000th the cost! Building this should be a no-brainer.

    We\’re talking about connecting the two densest and most vibrant neighborhoods in the entire city together. Hell, they should never have even been separated when they built 405.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Patrick April 2, 2008 at 4:00 pm

    \”If you want to see the basic, brutalist style of bike/ped crossings, just come to my neighborhood, you’ll see the Failing Street Crossing, the Bryant Street Crossing, they’re not used.\” S. Adams

    I ride the Failing Street crossing almost everyday. Many days shared with other users on the bridge as well.

    Good coverage of this issue. I have a better understanding now of why using the old bridge \”might\” be worth the extra 1.5 bills.

    I guess what I\’m learning about city government is that just because money is saved, doesn\’t mean it will be used for other projects.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • zilfondel April 2, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    steve wrote:

    \”The two dissenters both mentioned the Tram cost over-runs. One supporter even acknowledged it. It is certainly a debateable position that Sam Adams and his history of ineptitude cost us this bridge.\”

    Oh yeah? I\’d like for you to spell out Sam\’s \”ineptitude.\”

    Secondly, if it were put up to a simple majority vote, it would have passed.

    In this case, Potter is the polarizing element. His move was purely political (unlike Saltzman\’s); particularly when this bridge would fulfill this very role:

    \”building more sidewalks for children to walk to school\”

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • zilfondel April 2, 2008 at 8:01 pm

    And BTW, Jonathan: Excellent coverage!

    Anyone else send an email of support to Sam? I think he played this whole thing out very well.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • wsbob April 2, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    \”If you want to see the basic, brutalist style of bike/ped crossings, just come to my neighborhood, you’ll see the Failing Street Crossing, the Bryant Street Crossing, they’re not used.\” S. Adams

    I\’m in favor of using the Sauvie Bridge, but I also wondered about Adams making that statement and what he based it on. Those crossings have had some problems, but a simple search will bring up threads here on the weblog detailing efforts on the part of the neighborhoods where those bridge crossings are located, to improve their safety and usability.

    Of course, since editor/reporter J Maus was rapidly transcribing it as Adams spoke, that statement may not have been his exact words or the whole statement in its entirety. A wider bridge than those would certainly be an advantage, but if it wound up costing 6.8 mil, as opposed to 4 mil for the cheap concrete bridge, that\’s certainly something to consider carefully. What more that Kuney has to say about the deal will be important.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Tim, NW Portland April 3, 2008 at 11:58 am

    I sat through the entire proceedings, and what a jarring experience to hear such passionate and well-composed testimony…only to have the Mayor tell Portland to stop give up and shut up. I knew there was a low chance the motion would pass, but I was floored by Potter\’s cold, cold attitude. I was under the impression that he was mostly ineffectual, but apparently that\’s not true when he can deliver such damaging results with little effort or regard. And Saltzman is hardly blameless, but he at least gave a vague impression of concern, whether true or not. We can\’t let this die now.

    Recommended Thumb up 0