At a packed neighborhood meeting last week, Oregon State University-Cascades representatives attempted to explain how the upcoming campus expansion could benefit the broader Bend community; particularly, transportation. Upgrades, like boosting busing services and greatly expanding bike lane infrastructure, were just a couple of the perks mentioned as Bend plans to greet a four-year university on the town’s west side. But instead of cheers and thought-provoking ideas, the gathered crowd mostly chose to see that higher-education glass as half empty, and responded with scowls and, during the Q&A session, nay-saying.
While we certainly would like to give the Boot in the pants to the grumpies; instead, we give the Glass Slipper this week to the ongoing process to leverage the arrival of the university as a means to improve and upgrade transportation systems on the city’s west side.
At the downtown meeting, Matt Shinderman, co-chair of the Campus Expansion advisory committee and senior instructor of Natural Resources, looked at the upcoming campus from several different angles, trying to shake out how this major addition—and the addition of a healthy number of college students to Bend —will impact traffic.
How can the school encourage students to reduce vehicle trips? Will there be enough alternative transportation modes? Is there enough housing on site to keep students from being commuter-students?
In a general response to those questions, Paul Dewey from Central Oregon LandWatch suggested that OSU-Cascades should integrate its transportation issues as more broad solutions for the community. “A lot of people need safer routes—not on the street but on safe pathways that run throughout the town,” said Dewey. “We should see this campus as a catalyst to change the larger community.” More specifically, he explained that OSU could help advocate for and create a city network of bike and walking pathways, not just ones that connect to campus, but throughout the area. It would encourage people to shift to fewer automobile trips
OSU agrees.
“Rather than impact, how can we make this a community resource?,” posited Shinderman. “We need to hear people’s concerns—and yes, some of those concerns are warranted—but there’s so much opportunity.” Shinderman went on to explain that “the city is very much partnering with OSU on this.” Ticking off current projects that could be tied into the college’s transportation blueprint—like the on-street parking, bigger bikes lanes and treed median of the Galveston Corridor project—he added, “it’s very much an enhancement project.”
“Really,” he said, “this is an opportunity to take a strategic and coordinated look and say, ‘how do we want this to be for the next 50 years?'”
Shinderman’s question is a good one: This enormous addition to the city’s west side is happening. It is unfolding in the next couple years—and instead of being problem-observers, we highly recommend residents instead try to be problem-solvers and, more generally, view the OSU-Cascades campus as a virtue, not a vice.
By virtue of having a campus on the west side, for example, OSU-Cascades should be able to leverage increased service of transit. Doing so will solve a lingering problem for the city, and increase east-west connectivity and create more flexible route options. Moreover, there is a very real opportunity right here, right now to expand these services with grant money and donations from OSU-Cascades.
Moreover, there is an important opportunity with the new campus, and the small population boom it will bring; namely, the university can model the 21st Century transportation behavior that Bend sorely is lacking—increased public transportation, increased ride-sharing, more bike paths and commuting.
Such examples will be important cultural shifts for Bend. And, those start with the cultural shift of turning that frown upside down.
This article appears in Feb 6-12, 2014.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
What a worthless editorial. The Source had a chance to meaningfully contribute to the needed debate and discussion in regards to Cascades-OSU site selection process and the lack of transparency of decisions being made and, instead, totally whiffed it.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the concerns of those “grumps” (it must feel good to anonomously insult your fellow citizens, eh big fella?), your paper could do some actual journalism and critical analysis and see why they are upset, whether they have a valid issue, and what altenatives they propose. But that would mean you’d actually have to interview someone and pretend to give their values and concerns the thought it deserves, I guess.
The haughty and condescending tone of the writer shows through and a great opportunity to engage in critical thinking was missed only to turn into a glib bike lane puff piece instead… WTF?
Bottom Line: Nothing to see here folks, the Source says we should just “Turn that Frown Upside Down” since it’s all rainbows and unicorns in Bend and, clearly, we should all just be thankful to have such great “thought leadership” out there to tell us what we should want.
The whining is indeed getting old. The university isn’t going away, so we need to focus on solving the transportation problem.
And Eastsider, since you show such poor reading comprehension, here’s the point of the editorial for you: “the university can model the 21st Century transportation behavior that Bend sorely is lacking—increased public transportation, increased ride-sharing, more bike paths and commuting.” And that will be part of an important “cultural shift[] for Bend” toward planning a more sustainable community.
If you have better ideas, maybe spend more time articulating them and less time bitching about the Source.
What an excellent portrayal of one of the – if not THE – greatest economic and sustainable growth opportunities to come to Bend in a long time. Transformation, innovation and dynamic community growth requires a bit of stretching and thinking outside the box. Yes, no one said that would be easy. Thanks Source, Bend will indeed rise to the occasion to help make the OSU-Cascades campus a great community investment… Glass Slippers to ya!
Oh, DJ…
I usually agree with you, but your comments are right out of the play book OSU (taxpayer paid) staff are spouting.
Platitudes about ‘how everything will work out’ don’t satisfy those of us who live/own property in the impact zone. The so-called Community Feedback committee is primarily composed of real estate agents,developers,city staff (the comments by Barram epitomize the ignorance and insensitivity of city hall)and those who stand to profit from this project.
When I’ve asked for SOLUTIONS to problems that have been raised by my fellow citizens I receive non specific ‘crap’!
— how are bike paths (non street) going to be paid for?
— how are extra police that WILL be required to be paid for?
— how will housing code violations be dealt with when THAT city function is MANNED by a very part time employee? and doesn’t work now. BTW, US Justice Dep’t studies show that for every code violation, the rate of crime in a neighborhood goes up.
— who is going to pay for the property remediation this site requires (not the developer…who has never paid impact costs for building here!
— the sewer/waste facility problems are real and have been pointed out by previous and more qualified writers to this forum; as has this ‘proposed’ , wishful thinking ‘green’ building that will create its own non-polluting power. (Hah! And they also have a ‘bridge’ to sell you)
The answer to all the above? US, the taxpayers. Why should we have to pay for one more, loosely planned boondoggle?
The BS index on Everything on this site is just too high. I think state agencies need to examine the project before one shovel hits the ground! We’ve seen these kinds of public $$ fraud,waste and abuse in Bend too many times.
Great comment, Lahaina. I certainly agree these questions need answers. Unfortunately, it seems clear that you may need to demand them. That’s not whining, it’s just civic involvement – the kind we sorely need more of. My comment was not directed at people such as yourself.
I’m still not convinced this is a “boondoggle.” It seems more like an exhaustive (and exhausting) public process. These things have to be “loosely planned” in a democracy where private parties can buy property anywhere it is properly zoned.
You seem very skeptical, which is a good thing.But I think you may be a little too skeptical. For example, you scoff at “wishful thinking ‘green’ building that will create its own non-polluting power.” It is, in fact, extremely easy these days to build a zero-energy building. Why would that be “wishful thinking”?