Comments on: Randy Gragg’s 2004 Portland Architecture Recap http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/ Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:46:32 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Mikey http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-88 Mikey Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:43:32 +0000 http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/#comment-88 Interesting that he doesn't get into that. Maybe he didn't want to get into the politics of it? I was sort of surprised at how political he got, and I want more of this "whole picture" kind of piece. Even with that omission I still think it's a good article (criteria being that it got me interested and started me doing my own research). Interesting that he doesn’t get into that. Maybe he didn’t want to get into the politics of it? I was sort of surprised at how political he got, and I want more of this “whole picture” kind of piece. Even with that omission I still think it’s a good article (criteria being that it got me interested and started me doing my own research).

]]> By: The One True b!X http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-87 The One True b!X Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:48:03 +0000 http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/#comment-87 He kind of bungles this one, actually. There's nothing to indicate at this stage that Goodman's switcheroo on light rail is a sign of things to come, or evidence that some part of the Portland planning process is unravelled. What various media outlets pointed out was that Goodman didn't change sides on the light rail "local improvement district" matter until after City Council took part of the downtown parking garage empire away from him. It's called political payback, not the City's planning process coming apart at the seams. So, I don't particularly believe Gragg got this one right. He kind of bungles this one, actually. There’s nothing to indicate at this stage that Goodman’s switcheroo on light rail is a sign of things to come, or evidence that some part of the Portland planning process is unravelled.

What various media outlets pointed out was that Goodman didn’t change sides on the light rail “local improvement district” matter until after City Council took part of the downtown parking garage empire away from him.

It’s called political payback, not the City’s planning process coming apart at the seams.

So, I don’t particularly believe Gragg got this one right.

]]> By: Mikey http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-86 Mikey Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:09:56 +0000 http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/#comment-86 oops! Thanks! oops!

Thanks!

]]> By: Cat http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-85 Cat Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:07:30 +0000 http://portland.metblogs.com/2004/12/29/randy-graggs-2004-portland-architecture-recap/#comment-85 (psst...it's Gragg, not Gregg) (psst…it’s Gragg, not Gregg)

]]>