This is funny, I was just talking about this with a coworker yesterday. I got lost in a neighborhood on foot, trying to find a shortcut to a bus stop. I found a gravel road that had been posted off and turned into a garden on either side. Next time, I'm going through.
Thanks! I have long wondered about this and have been meaning to suggest it for an article.
Go check out SE Henry between 47th and 48th a few blocks south of Woodstock. If it were longer it would be some of the best mountain biking in the city.
@Tony I'm wondering the same thing. To sample 59 subjects in the whole Woodstock neighborhood and then try and generalize their responses on everyone else in the 'hood seems like quite the stretch.
I just moved into town recently from the East Coast and have noticed this as well! Lots and lots of roads are without curbs (here! where it rains a lot!) and some of those are gravel and REALLY pitted and potholed. I don't know if it's the last vestiges of being the frontier or just some Portland thing I don't get but every time my GPS sends me down one of these I don't know about it confuses the hell out of me.
Tony and Jacob,
I pulled the chart out of context a bit, but I believe the numbers on it are from one neighborhood meeting where the researchers surveyed the 59 people who came to the meeting. It's a cheap tactic, not a perfect one, but the city does it all the time, too.
I think the anecdotal info in the report on how the city may better inform and assist residents on addressing the management of unimproved roads in Woodstock is very interesting and is presented well.
I also have no doubt that "some neighbors prefer the personal reclamation of public space".
However, there are over 8,000 people in the Woodstock neighborhood.
A results of a survey of 59 residents and visitors that self-select to attend a neighborhood meeting has no real analytical value.
This is the equivalent of information from a self-selected focus group. Taking it out of that context isn't merely imperfect, it is misleading.
The survey was administered online as well as during our first public meeting. Although we tried to distribute the survey as broadly as possible, the majority of respondents were people who live alongside unimproved streets, so the survey findings can't be generalized to the neighborhood as a whole.
The survey was one component of a larger public outreach effort. The most important thing we found is that there is a lot of variety in how people in Woodstock view unimproved streets, and one-size-fits-all approaches to funding and designing street improvements aren't meeting most people's needs.
While I do agree that this wouldn't be a very good representative of the entirety, it does provide good insight into a possible outcome. This provides the probability that some sort of expansion of the sample group may very well yield a similar result. But nothing is certain in analysis until proven otherwise, of course. :p
Forget Woodstock, go out further to Brentwood Darlington. It's a mess. the City won't pave. They want residents to pay for a LID. People are poor out there, they can't afford an extra monthly bill in addition to high water and sewer and increasing utility costs. And, look at the "sidewalk" from 60th & Flavell on down through 72nd. Rutted, gravelly, full of potholes, worse than the street. Definitely to walk on or in. Mayor Adams, where art thou?
Go check out SE Henry between 47th and 48th a few blocks south of Woodstock. If it were longer it would be some of the best mountain biking in the city.
Sarah Mirk, I give you 128 miles of new bike lanes. You're welcome.
Were there only a total of 59 respondents?
Or that 39 percent of respondents said "No"?
If it is the later, how many people were surveyed?
I pulled the chart out of context a bit, but I believe the numbers on it are from one neighborhood meeting where the researchers surveyed the 59 people who came to the meeting. It's a cheap tactic, not a perfect one, but the city does it all the time, too.
I also have no doubt that "some neighbors prefer the personal reclamation of public space".
However, there are over 8,000 people in the Woodstock neighborhood.
A results of a survey of 59 residents and visitors that self-select to attend a neighborhood meeting has no real analytical value.
This is the equivalent of information from a self-selected focus group. Taking it out of that context isn't merely imperfect, it is misleading.
The survey was one component of a larger public outreach effort. The most important thing we found is that there is a lot of variety in how people in Woodstock view unimproved streets, and one-size-fits-all approaches to funding and designing street improvements aren't meeting most people's needs.
-Emily Lieb, LARKE (project team)