RTP Exercise: Equity

This is the fifth in a series of six posts in the first phase of our online RTP policy exercise. Your job is to describe what the outcomes will look like if the RTP succeeds in producing the 2040 objective of Equity:

Equitable access to affordable housing, jobs, transportation, recreation and services for people in all income levels is provided.

To remind you of the rules for this exercise:

– An ‘outcome’ must be reduced to a single ‘bullet’, i.e., a one sentence statement. You may follow that with a single short paragraph providing further explanation if you want.
– If you agree with someone else’s outcome, quote it in your comment (my preference is italics for quoting) and say you agree and elaborate (no more than one paragraph) on why if you want.
No criticism of other people’s proposed outcomes
– If you have questions or comments about the exercise or rules, comment on the exercise overview post, not here please.

12 responses to “RTP Exercise: Equity”

  1. Multiple Equity Bullets:

    All tax abatement programs except for low income housing are eliminated.

    The market and not the government determine what types of housing are constructed.

    PDC receives fair market value for land sold or provided to developers.

    Property owners outside urban renewal districts are no longer charged on their property taxes to pay off urban renewal bonds.

    School districts receive their portion of property tax dollars from new and increased development in urban renewal districts.

    Developers pay for parks and other amenities associated with new and redeveloped neighborhoods.

    Most development is financially self-sustainable.

    Single family home neighborhoods are protected from intense and large over development.

    Residential property taxes within Portland are lowered to attract more families and better reflect the costs of living in the Portland suburbs.

    Portland’s excessive storm water run off charge for property owners is eliminated.

    Transit fares better reflect the costs of operation.

    Bicyclists and the bicycle mode of transport are directly taxed to pay for specialized bicycle infrastructure.

    Alternative transportation options are financially self-sustainable

    No more tax dollars are spent/wasted to promote one form of transport over another,

    There are no take-a-ways from existing transport infrastructure when an alternative transportation option is added.

    Busses pull out of motor vehicle travel lanes and let other and stakeholder traffic to pass when stopping for passengers.

    Bicyclists are required to obey all of the same traffic laws motorists are required to obey and learn what the word “STOP” really means.

    Bicyclists are given no special rights or treatment when it comes to deciding who has the right-of-way.

  2. To quote Penalosa, the former mayor of Bogota, we need to show that “a citizen on a $20 bicycle is equally important to one in a $30,000 car.”

    He made this comment in the context of explaining the importance of investing in separated bikeways, but it’s not a bad outcome to aim for more generally.

  3. warning: lurker comment ahead.

    By all means, we should promote all forms of transportation over the automobile. It is unsustainable economically, as well as environmentally.

    Concerning bicyclists and the law, I will stop at all stop signs when you do. I will go further and ask that you drive at or under the posted speed limit, give bicyclists 3 feet or more when passing, stop for pedestrians at marked and unmarked crossings, and refrain from cell phone use while driving. There is more to mention, but this will suffice for now. Let know when you get that accomplished.

    That was off-topic, in my opinion, but too egregious a comment to let pass.

  4. “a citizen on a $20 bicycle is equally important to one in a $30,000 car.”

    Except that the person in the $30,000 car just put $30k into the economy vs. a measly $20 dollars. So really, who is doing more for the positive employment of the country?

    …but it could be said, who is destroying more of the country also.

  5. More equitable sharing of the street’s public space by reducing motor vehicle speeds in residential streets to 15 MPH and in commercial Main Street districts to 20 MPH.

    Reduce speeds allow everyone, no matter their age or level of ability to move freely and safely along and across these public areas. Design… including wider sidewalks, narrow travel lanes, bike lanes, cross walks, curb extensions… would make it easier for motorists to observe posted speed limits and share this vital public space with neighbors who are on foot or on bikes.

  6. -Discourage interstate warehouse/distribution land uses. Job creation per acre is low, and regional air quality and congestion suffer.

  7. – Reduce transportation costs by creating a mix of housing types and prices close to all job centers.

  8. – Manage transportation infrastructure to provide equal access

    Currently freeways are managed to serve those who are on them at the expense of those who need to get on. This is one purpose of ramp meters, to limit access so that those already on the freeway won’t be inconvenienced. This means that a suburban commuter from Clark County going through North Portland to downtown or the Lloyd Center has priority over a person in North Portland who wants to get on the freeway to get to jobs in Tigard or Wilsonville.

  9. – 90% of households and 100% of businesses with employees in Metro area are a 10 minute walk from frequent, reliable, useful public transportation.

    – All households and businesses in Metro area are within 1000 feet (reasonably safe ride) of a safe, low-traffic bicycle boulevard and/or off-street bicycle path

    – All streets are walkable, either through a sidewalk and frequent, safe crosswalks OR through very low volume of slow, controlled traffic that makes it safe to walk on the street.