Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About St. Johns review. (Saint Johns, Or.) 1904-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 30, 2015)
Page 4 * The St. Johns Review * #22 OCT. 30, 2015 Email: reviewnewspaper@gmail.com * Mail: PO Box 83068, Port. OR 97283 * Web: www.stjohnsreview.com * Phone: 503-283-5086 COMMUNIT Ivy Island Continued from Page 1 By Gayla Patton nization is in favor of the removal of Ivy Island. Lindsay Jensen, Ex- ecutive Director for St. Johns Main Street said, “We are in support of it happening. We recognize that sig- nificant planning, resources, and neighborhood input went into de- veloping the St. Johns/Lombard Plan, which is the basis/reason for Ivy Island being vacated. While it’s al- ways good to re-visit planning documents and to update plans to align with the current needs of the neighbor- hood, we feel that the vacation of Ivy Island is still relevant and an important Resident and business owner John Teply would step to improve like to see Ivy Island remain where it is. It may be removed with a coming development. the Lombard/ Richmond intersection.” Johns works well as a clear entry Jensen added, “The current Ivy Is- point. One can see through the land configuration is not currently trees on Ivy Island to the street and safe or accessible, being surround- businesses beyond. It is a welcom- ed on all sides with traffic lanes and ing “doorway” into our Business no supportive adjacent uses. The District, and the present slip lane proposed development will include works well with the triangular two additional open spaces, one of shape of this intersection; being which will be dedicated as perma- both inviting to visitors and mak- nently open to the public. The two ing it easy for folks to drive into additional open spaces will be sup- St Johns. Imagine now, instead of ported by the adjacent commercial the current entrance, we construct spaces and residential units above. a brick wall at this entryway to St In addition the open spaces will be Johns. The intention of a wall is to safer than Ivy Island, only having keep people out. This is in essence one side of the space exposed to what the new entry way will be; a traffic lanes. four story brick apartment building St. Johns Main Street appreci- that will block the natural flow of ates Farid Bolouri willingness to movement into the St Johns Busi- personally invest in the St. Johns/ ness District.” Lombard plan, but we also recog- Jensen said in her email to the nize that this is a great opportuni- Review: The current configuration ty to leverage the street vacation of Ivy Island is auto-centric and process to encourage Farid and does not create a safe pedestrian his team to address some essential or bicycle environment at the in- neighborhood concerns about the tersections of Richmond & Lom- development (which will happen bard and Charleston & Lombard regardless of the Ivy Island out- (as supported in the Intersection come). In a letter sent to the city Safety Audit of North Richmond in partnership with the St. Johns and North Jersey by ODOT, 2011). Neighborhood Association last The reconfiguration of the inter- month, here were our key requests: section through the vacation of Ivy • Having the developer sit down Island and the proposed develop- with the Housing Development ment will reduce the traffic speed Center and/or Portland Housing of vehicles entering the St. Johns Bureau to learn about potential af- town center by replacing the “slip fordable housing resources or po- lane” with a dedicated hard-right tential partners. We are committed turn. This coupled with pedestrian to bringing more affordable hous- crossing improvements at the inter- ing into the neighborhood and con- section of Richmond & Lombard sider this to be a top priority for St. and Charleston & Lombard will Johns. increase pedestrian safety and use. • Ensuring that our iconic St. Johns Teply’s idea is to keep Ivy Island marquee is preserved and placed and add sculptures, art and make it somewhere visible on the property an island garden that people will (ideally in the public plaza) want to come see. “We could even • Having the developer and his put in some special lighting,” he team incorporate native greenery said. “It would then be an entrance into both of the plaza spaces to help into St. Johns that people from all offset the loss of greenery from the over will want to visit.” traffic island The next meeting is at the Plan- • Investing in a marketing campaign ning and Sustainability Commis- for the business district during con- sion on November 17. They will struction to ensure that customers make their judgment and then it know that business is open as usual goes to city council approximately • Ensuring that a memorandum of six weeks after that where Council understanding is developed and will decide whether to vacate the signed between the public library property or not. and the Union at St. Johns regard- The Planning and Sustainabili- ing the use of the shared parking lot ty Commission is at 1900 SW 4th • Having the city and/or the devel- Ave, Suite 2500A. According to oper conduct a traffic impact anal- their website meetings are general- ysis that includes the surrounding ly 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM. residential area and make recom- What are your thoughts and ideas mendations for transportation im- about keeping or vacating Ivy Is- provements on local streets to miti- land? Share them with readers. gate potential traffic impacts. Email: reviewnewspaper@gmail. In a letter to the Review by com. Letters will be accepted also Shae Uisna (#18 Sept. 4 2015 is- by sending them to: The Review, sue,) Uisna said, “Right now the PO Box 83068, Portland, OR., Eastern entrance to Downtown St 97283. Citizens tak By Barbara Quinn The Review The Portland Harbor Community Ad- visory Group (PHCAG) hosted a press conference on Monday, Oct. 19, 2015 to announce written testimony to the EPA’s National Remedy Review Board in response to the Conceptual Plan for the cleanup by EPA Region 10. Mem- bers representing north and northwest neighborhood associations, Audubon and Willamette Riverkeeper, gathered with individuals and other community groups to make a unified statement to media, while a fisherman cast from the Cathedral Park beach behind them. As the superfund process contin- ues to build momentum, residents are encouraged to keep updated with The Willamette Insider, the PHCAG’s free, brief, bimonthly newsletter that offers updates on the process and will publish the yet-to-be-decided dates for formal public comment period coming up with- in months. Those interested can sign up for the newsletter is through Portland- HarborCAG.info on the righthand side of the website. Below are excerpts from the PHCAG statement and paper, which can be ac- cessed at http://portlandharborcag.info/ sites/default/files/CommentstoNRRB- fromPHCAGr.pdf. Excepts from the PHCAG paper and statement: “We take seriously the goal of a long- term remedy meant to last into future centuries and recognize this process as a unique opportunity. We have perse- vered though this long process for more than ten years despite delays by pollut- ers, external pressures and the challeng- es of bringing together a very diverse community. Now it is finally time for the community to be heard. None of the cleanup alternatives pre- pared by the Lower Willamette Group and revised by the EPA, labeled Alter- natives B through G, will achieve either fish that are safe to eat or satisfy re- quirements of the Clean Water Act. We have told the EPA that we want a clean- up plan that says at the end, there will no longer be a need for fish advisories like the sign posted at Cathedral Park. We do not want pressure for cheap and fast to override the need to get it done right! Getting it right is the most important criterion. We favor maximum removal of contamination from the lower Willamette that will offer a long- term, effective solution. Contamination left behind is a continuing risk to hu- man health and the environment. EPA needs to address these issues by imple- menting a more vigorous remedy—an alternative we call G+. It is critical to protect members of our community, especially underserved members who have suffered exposure to river contaminants for many decades. These effects include direct health im- pacts, the psychosocial stresses of liv- ing with contamination and the loss or reduction of critical community oppor- tunities such as subsistence and cultural fishing, recreation and access to the riv- er. We are particularly concerned about members of the houseless community living in contaminated areas, under- served communities that rely on sub-