Community Comments on the draft (Oct 26) Plan | MAP Committee Forum

This forum allows the MAP committee to communicate with each other while keeping their communication visible to the public. Opinions expressed in this forum by a committee member are their own and do not represent the committee as a whole. If you would like to get a daily digest of forum posts and website updates, please sign up.

 
You must be logged in to post Login


Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


 






Wildcard Usage:
*    matches any number of characters
%    matches exactly one character

Community Comments on the draft (Oct 26) Plan

UserPost

9:15 am
November 22, 2011


SarahL

posts 30

From William Wild:

MAP II Final
Report Draft II (October 26, 2011) Comments by William Wild, citizen at meeting
of November 21, 2011

 

Exiting Conditions

  • Page 11 – Area Demographics… The income information
    in the last paragraph is confusing.
  • Page 12 – Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail…
    The statement about the number of jobs and
    personal earnings the PMLR project will create does not belong in the MAP
    report. The numbers cited are for the entire project. The Oak Grove area
    will see only a tiny fraction of those numbers. To include them in this
    report is deceptive.
  • Pages 14 and 15 – Market Analysis…To attract
    and support new commercial development and businesses, it will be
    necessary to increase the mean income of the study area above the current
    level. To achieve this, the focus must be on building housing that will appeal
    to income brackets which raise that median level.

 

Building on the MAP Vision

  • Page 28 – Strengthening Transportation
    Connections…One of the concerns that arose in MAP
    1 was the lack of east-west connections through the area. Phase
    2 seems to have shifted that focus to east-west connections to the
    Boulevard, especially for bikes and peds. The paragraph should reinforce
    both of these connectivity concerns.
  • Page 30 – Special Transportation Area…Clackamas County is in the process of
    updating the Transportation Services Plan (TSP).
    The MAP Committee should
    integrate their transportation findings for the MAP
    area with the TSP process to
    assure appropriate consideration is given for meeting community
    objectives.
  • Page 32 – Activity Clusters sidebar bullet
    3…For economic success, it is important that clusters not only have good
    neighborhood connectivity, but that they also have good connectivity to
    the overall area.
  • Page 32 – Activity Clusters introductory paragraph…Wherein
    it states, “Additional housing is also needed in the area to
    support existing and future businesses.” Again, in order for these
    businesses and developments to succeed long term, new housing must appeal
    to income brackets that will raise the mean income level of the area.