|
Portlanders
understand and appreciate the value of
long-term community planning.
Most respondents who mention planning
value Portland’s history of strong, forward-thinking
planning. They credit past planning efforts
with creating the livable, unique, beautiful
Portland they see today and look to planners
to continue this legacy into the future.
Where disagreement and discontent emerge
is in regard to the current state of planning,
which many feel suffers from a lack of
long-range vision and insufficient public
input. Portlanders believe in long-range
planning and want to work with planners
to bring about a city that is true to
their values. Many express gratitude to
visionPDX for soliciting their opinions
and state their hope that a community-led
vision can guide current and future long-term
planning efforts.
Note:
Themes
from this section overlap at and times
repeat those noted in Government:
Spending
and Urban
Livability: Land Use.
-
Successful long-range planning has helped
make Portland what it is.
-
Portland must build on its legacy of
successful long-term planning.
- Currently,
planning seems divorced from a long-term
community vision.
- Economic
development planning needs re-alignment.
- Community
members value the opportunity to participate
in shaping the city’s future.
- To what
extent is the community involved in
the planning process?
- Successful
long-range planning has helped
make Portland what it is.
- Portlanders are aware of the
role that planning has played
in creating a livable urban
environment.
- Many respondents cite with
pride Portland’s past planning
achievements such as Pioneer
Courthouse Square, the Urban
Growth Boundary and Tom McCall
Waterfront Park.
- Many feel that previous planning
efforts owe a large part of
their success to high levels
of public involvement in the
planning process.
| "Portland
has many great parks and
neighborhoods which allows
its residents to feel comfortable
and friendly to strangers.
The community feeling encourages
political and social dialogue
which further the minds
and hearts of our citizens.
A + for city planning!” |
| "I
love the way Portland has
a history of thoughtful
city planning. The wonderful
mix of parks with neighborhoods.
The environmentally friendly
ethic, recycling at the
curb, bike and other means
of transportation incorporated
into the planning. The Urban
Growth Boundary…” |
| "What:
PDX is very eclectic, and
the planning is well-done.
Local businesses and restaurants
are wonderful. Different
community events—Waterfront
and Pioneer Square events,
concerts at the zoo. The
rebuilding of neighborhoods.
The mixed income/development
housing. Love the parks.
Why: PDX makes me feel good.
PDX is unique.” |
- Portland
must build on its legacy of
successful long-term planning.
- As the city grows, Portland
must update its long-range plans
and create new plans so that
the city’s cherished livability
and unique character are maintained.
- Strong planning can continue
to distinguish Portland from
“Anywhere, USA” and set a positive
example to cities across the
country and around the world.
| "[In
2030, Portland is] a beacon
for the rest of the world
as the most livable, inviting,
and functional city in America.
A place that policy makers
turn to when they take on
the inevitable work of re-making
their sprawling, unsustainable
urban places into livable
cities again.” |
| "[In
2030] we have created an
atmosphere of success…good
companies want to move here
for the quality of life,
the brilliant work force,
the visionary city planning.
Resources go to preventing
problems rather than fixing
past shortsightedness.” |
- Currently,
planning seems divorced from
a long-term community vision.
- Many wonder who currently
shapes planning: the public?
Developers? A community vision?
- There is the perception that
currently, many major decisions
are not guided by a long-range
community plan but rather by
here-and-now pressures from
influential stakeholders.
- A clear community vision can
provide guidance to policymakers
and planners and prevent “developers
from deciding what’s best for
Portland.”
- It is important for decision-makers
to have a long-term plan to
look to in order to resist the
pressures of elections, politics,
annual or two-year budgets and
special interest groups.
| "I
want us to return to a vision
that looks ahead, not just
at money and growth. We
will end up like Seattle
if we continue to let developers
decide what is good for
Portland.” |
| “Put
simply there is no real
leadership or vision in
Portland. There’s a lot
of growth and change, but
no unifying vision of what
this city is going to become.” |
| "[In
2030] money does not govern
the vision of the city.
Rather healthy and prosperous
community rules.” |
- “Plan beyond a single
political term in office. Get
widespread public buy-in so
that it doesn’t fizzle when
the current leader is replaced.
Start today.”
- “Get out more and talk to
the people who actually live
and work in the city and rely
less on the input of big businesses
and developers who have their
own financial agendas.”
- Economic
development planning needs re-alignment.
- Many respondents are concerned
about the influence that developers
seem to have over the economic
development planning process.
They want planning to be shaped
by the vision of the community
and the City Council, not by
those who stand to profit from
the plans (such as developers).
- There is concern that the
Portland Development Commission
(PDC) in particular is out of
touch with the community’s values
and vision (see Government:
Government Performance).
- Many express the desire to
align PDC’s short-term and mid-term
economic development plans with
a broader, long-range community
vision.
| “The
development commission has
drifted from the original
vision and come to be too
dominated by business interest
with a sacrifice for the
long-term vision and the
citizens.” |
- Community
members value the opportunity
to participate in shaping the
city’s future.
- Community members want to
be directly involved in shaping
the future of their city.
- A number of people thank visionPDX
in the survey for asking them
to share their thoughts on the
city’s future.
| “I
value the fact that we have
a local government that
would ask us questions like
these, and so many citizens
with answers! Thank you!” |
| "I
like that Portland values
its people. This is demonstrated
in so many ways – shutting
down freeways for the Bridge
Pedal (I am so proud of
Portland for doing that!),
having human-friendly building
codes… conducting surveys
like this one. It is clear
that Portland values its
people and that its people
value Portland.” |
- “Through the visionPDX
– create/distill a top 10 list
of things we can do. Look for
those things we can do on a
daily basis.”
|
- To
what extent is the community involved
in the planning process?
While most agree that the City has excelled
at public involvement in the past, there
is disagreement over whether or not
the City is currently doing a good job
of involving the public in the planning
process. Three main views are articulated:
Public involvement is working.
Some respondents feel that current
public involvement efforts are very
good and applaud the City for being
accessible to community feedback and
encouraging this feedback through
efforts like visionPDX. These community
members express gratitude for the
opportunity to get involved and cite
Portland’s public involvement efforts
as part of what makes the city livable.
Public involvement needs
to be broadened.
A second group believes in the public
involvement process but feels that
it leaves out significant constituencies,
such as people with disabilities and
ethnic minorities. These respondents
question the lack of minority voices
in leadership positions and call for
more concerted outreach efforts into
minority communities:
| “Do
serious recruitment of minorities
to participate in all aspects
of city planning. Note: this
does not mean inviting over
and over the usual minority
people.” |
Public involvement is suspect.
A third perspective voiced is that
current public involvement efforts
are not genuine and simply mask the
influence that developers and other
“insiders” have on the planning process.
These respondents feel that public
involvement is paid lip service
while “the usual suspects” are actually
shaping policy and planning decisions.
Some of these individuals also question
visionPDX, wondering “what will be
done with all of our answers?” They
like the concept of visionPDX but
noted that no where (website, City
promotion, etc…) does it mention how
the feedback will be used or whether
citizens will have access to this
feedback.
| “I’d
like decision-makers to involve
the public earlier and in ways
that are meaningful, not just
perfunctory.” |
|
