Beginning with the premise that we cannot afford everything, Southwest Corridor Plan partners have continued to engage communities from Sherwood to Portland on the benefits and tradeoffs of different types of public investment. Using an online interactive planning game, residents were asked how they would make the most of public resources to address corridor transportation needs and best benefit their communities.
"The responses show that people are not as interested in major roadway expansions as we would have expected," said Metro Councilor Craig Dirksen. "People are asking for a balanced approach, with more emphasis on smaller things like sidewalk infill, safer bike lanes, and improved local bus service."
From Nov. 13 through Jan. 1, project partners hosted the online interactive planning game, Shape SW, on the Southwest Corridor Plan website. Shape SW asked users to submit their ideas for investment strategies and referred users to a questionnaire to express why they chose those investments. The online game and questionnaire were designed to help residents better conceptualize and offer feedback on the benefits and tradeoffs of potential investments. During this period, plan partners received 695 submissions to the Shape SW game, 471 responses to the electronic questionnaires and 20 paper-version questionnaires.
"I think the Shape SW game drove home the point that it's about choices and that a major consideration is the effects – positive or negative – that those choices will have on our ability to get to where we want to go and on the health and economics of our neighborhoods," said Dirksen.
The information received from the public through the Shape SW game will help decision-makers make choices about where to focus investments as well as what type and what levels of investments would best benefit corridor communities.
The Shape SW game first asked users to identify up to five future transit connections that they would like to see within the corridor. The vast majority of participants envisioned at least some form of high capacity transit for one or more connections. The major connection points that participants most often selected were downtown Portland, Hillsdale/Burlingame, downtown Tigard, Multnomah Village, OHSU/South Portland and Portland Community College.
"It's clear that local bus service is an important issue for corridor residents. And although there are some folks adamant about 'no light rail,' the majority of respondents asked for some sort of high capacity transit – whether light rail or bus rapid transit," said Metro Councilor Bob Stacey.
Stacey emphasized that a strategy for the corridor also has to consider the physical constraints of the corridor.
"Even if people demanded more or wider roads – and if we could afford them – there are a lot of areas in the corridor where we don't have the room" said Stacey. "Moving forward, we want to continue to examine how we can improve mobility in the corridor. This can include strategic road improvements, making safe bike and pedestrian access, improvements to local bus service and looking at high capacity transit options, but we have to balance all of the ways that people get around while increasing overall travel capacity."
The second part of the Shape SW game asked participants to determine their optimal levels of investment in driving, walking, biking, transit and nature and parks under a limited budget. In general, participants recommended the investment level and focus for each type as:
- driving: safety, maintenance, and intersection and connectivity improvements
- walking: adding sidewalks on major roads
- biking: on-street striped lanes and/or some clearly separated route
- transit: improved local service, though most comments regarding future transit demonstrate a desire for high capacity transit in the corridor
Responses to questions about parks and nature investments gave conflicting information regarding priorities. Some information prioritizes street trees, other information prioritizes trails through natural areas. Stream health and water quality also ranks high, and a few comments expressed that the questions should have given more focus to these issues, emphasizing the connection to infrastructure and storm runoff.
When asked what factors influenced them in their investment choices, participants most often selected quality of life followed by safety, access and environment.
By this summer, the cities, counties and agencies working together on the plan are hoping to come to an agreement on an investment package that will help generate the realize community vision.