"A View From The Trenches"
Gerry Howard Letter to the St Johns Review
October 2, 2015
Dear Editor,
As an original member of the Citizen Working Group (CWO) for the St. Johns/Lombard Plan, I am very interested in the discussion regarding the proposed Union at St. Johns project located at Lombard and Richmond which includes a redesign of the traffic island such that the city will allow the slip lane to be removed and the building to intrude into the vacated space. As noted by others, this will effectively construct a 4-story wall right at a strategic entrance to the business district. This was not the intent of the CWG. While the Plan itself does not discuss this intersection at length, the issue was an important topic of discussion at multiple CWG meetings. The design ultimately adopted as an element of the Plan came about due to feedback received from both St. Johns residents and businesses. At that time, the concerns revolved around excessive traffic speeds, crossing safety and the importance of the intersection as an iconic en try point into the business district. Many business owners felt that when through traffic was diverted off of Lombard and onto Ivanhoe, the business district suffered tre mendously. With entry into the slip lane being located to the east, it was opinioned that potential shoppers were already committed to the Richmond I Ivanhoe bypass before they even realized there was a business district. By eliminating the slip and installing traffic signals at the intersection, drivers would be able to see the business district while waiting for the signal to change. As I recall, the consensus of the CWG was that the slip lane would be removed, but the plaza would remain (and be enlarged). Obviously a brick wall would stymie the intent.
Please note that in addition to the Plan document itself, there were multiple studies prepared to provide background information used in the formulation of the Plan. The background work was performed by the Bureau of Planning along with contractors engaged by the City. Members of the CWG re viewed a large amount of infor mation over a 2-1/2 year period, including the various studies and reports prepared by contractors, the Portland Harbor Industrial Lands Study (Part One and Part Two), and the St. Johns Truck Study, along with feedback generated by Community Outreach efforts; Neighborhood Walks, Open Houses, Visioning Work shops, and input from the affected neighborhood and business associations.
Background information regarding the redesign of the intersection and of Ivy Island can be found in the Urban Development Concept Report prepared in May2003 by Lennertz Coyle & Associates along with (among others) E. D. Hovee & Company. This report has several appendixes including a Project Memorandum prepared by E. D. Hovee with the subject line”Assessment of St. Johns Waterfront Industrial Areas.” That 8-page memo itself incorporates various appendixes, including one identified as "Chapter 3: Alternatives Evaluation." On page 3-26 of that report is a more detailed discussion of the proposed re-design of the traffic island (Ivy Island) with several potential alternatives. Option C is the recommended design and an illustration of that option is found on page 3-26. Note the wording of the recommendation is as follows: "The project would remove the existing traffic island and shift the travel lanes on Lombard Street to the south. The gain in property to the north should be incorporated to (sic) a large sidewalk/plaza area (emphasis mine)." All of aforementioned background information is included in, and considered an official part of, the final St. Johns/Lombard Plan as adopted by the City of Portland.
I spent much time and effort assisting with the formulation of the St. Johns/Lombard Plan as a member of the CWG and would hate to see my efforts, and the efforts of many others, cast aside to accommodate a real estate developer in a quest to generate profit without regard to the intent of the residents ..and businesses in the St. Johns neighborhood and surrounding communities. I would hope that other members of the CWG along with Barry Manning, Senior Planner with the Bureau of Planning and Project Manager for the St. Johns/Lombard Plan, and Rich Newlands, Portland Department of Transportation (PDOT) Project Manager for the Plan, come forward to clarify the intent of the Plan vis-a-vis this particular intersection.
Gerry Howard
N. Concord Ave.
Gerry Howard Letter to the St Johns Review
October 2, 2015
Dear Editor,
As an original member of the Citizen Working Group (CWO) for the St. Johns/Lombard Plan, I am very interested in the discussion regarding the proposed Union at St. Johns project located at Lombard and Richmond which includes a redesign of the traffic island such that the city will allow the slip lane to be removed and the building to intrude into the vacated space. As noted by others, this will effectively construct a 4-story wall right at a strategic entrance to the business district. This was not the intent of the CWG. While the Plan itself does not discuss this intersection at length, the issue was an important topic of discussion at multiple CWG meetings. The design ultimately adopted as an element of the Plan came about due to feedback received from both St. Johns residents and businesses. At that time, the concerns revolved around excessive traffic speeds, crossing safety and the importance of the intersection as an iconic en try point into the business district. Many business owners felt that when through traffic was diverted off of Lombard and onto Ivanhoe, the business district suffered tre mendously. With entry into the slip lane being located to the east, it was opinioned that potential shoppers were already committed to the Richmond I Ivanhoe bypass before they even realized there was a business district. By eliminating the slip and installing traffic signals at the intersection, drivers would be able to see the business district while waiting for the signal to change. As I recall, the consensus of the CWG was that the slip lane would be removed, but the plaza would remain (and be enlarged). Obviously a brick wall would stymie the intent.
Please note that in addition to the Plan document itself, there were multiple studies prepared to provide background information used in the formulation of the Plan. The background work was performed by the Bureau of Planning along with contractors engaged by the City. Members of the CWG re viewed a large amount of infor mation over a 2-1/2 year period, including the various studies and reports prepared by contractors, the Portland Harbor Industrial Lands Study (Part One and Part Two), and the St. Johns Truck Study, along with feedback generated by Community Outreach efforts; Neighborhood Walks, Open Houses, Visioning Work shops, and input from the affected neighborhood and business associations.
Background information regarding the redesign of the intersection and of Ivy Island can be found in the Urban Development Concept Report prepared in May2003 by Lennertz Coyle & Associates along with (among others) E. D. Hovee & Company. This report has several appendixes including a Project Memorandum prepared by E. D. Hovee with the subject line”Assessment of St. Johns Waterfront Industrial Areas.” That 8-page memo itself incorporates various appendixes, including one identified as "Chapter 3: Alternatives Evaluation." On page 3-26 of that report is a more detailed discussion of the proposed re-design of the traffic island (Ivy Island) with several potential alternatives. Option C is the recommended design and an illustration of that option is found on page 3-26. Note the wording of the recommendation is as follows: "The project would remove the existing traffic island and shift the travel lanes on Lombard Street to the south. The gain in property to the north should be incorporated to (sic) a large sidewalk/plaza area (emphasis mine)." All of aforementioned background information is included in, and considered an official part of, the final St. Johns/Lombard Plan as adopted by the City of Portland.
I spent much time and effort assisting with the formulation of the St. Johns/Lombard Plan as a member of the CWG and would hate to see my efforts, and the efforts of many others, cast aside to accommodate a real estate developer in a quest to generate profit without regard to the intent of the residents ..and businesses in the St. Johns neighborhood and surrounding communities. I would hope that other members of the CWG along with Barry Manning, Senior Planner with the Bureau of Planning and Project Manager for the St. Johns/Lombard Plan, and Rich Newlands, Portland Department of Transportation (PDOT) Project Manager for the Plan, come forward to clarify the intent of the Plan vis-a-vis this particular intersection.
Gerry Howard
N. Concord Ave.