Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.

For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.

Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!

E-mail us here.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 11, 2004 10:50 PM. The previous post in this blog was Pass the popcorn, Johnny. The next post in this blog is Comparative fault. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.



Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
Willamette Week
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Monday, October 11, 2004

49 ways to screw up Portland

I just came across the site where the city is showing off the first cut of winning designs for the great new real estate trend in Portland -- 15-foot-wide houses on 25-foot-wide lots.

Along with the forest of lousy condo towers we're paying the developers our tax dollars to build, now we're egging them on as they find every house in the older neighborhoods with any breathing space around it at all, and take away all the breathing space.

What Gragg-alicious junk. And when they sell it as the only way we can defeat urban sprawl, the great herd of sheep says "baaaaaaaaa."

I guess one way to cut down growth is to ruin the great neighborhoods of the city so that the old-timers move out of them. Then the "creative class" can take over and build us all a bright future. All part of the fun at the Theme Park. Saddest of all, Fireman Randy's in charge of this one.

Comments (42)

You got that right. WWP's neighborhood is all 25-foot lots, and as you can imagine, the rapacious developers drool regularly at our doorsteps with fancy offers of "urban improvement," but rarely with enough cash to erase the mortgages that most of us possess. It's the others, and the financially vulnerable they prey upon, often all too successfully.

Here's a word to our friend, Commissioner Randy: If he really likes these houses, may he blessed with them on his every side, and his neighbors'.

How could he not know that these New York exported Brownstones not rob the urban poor and middle class of the one and very single thing they have always hoped for: a single-family home in a single-family neighborhood. It's Portland's shame, and Commissioner Randy's too, that Portland has abandoned the regular taxpayer's life dream in exchange for a Metro-induced hallucination that covets a high-rise condominium next to every dwindling and suddenly out-of-fashion single-family dwelling.

A pox on you all.

All of this is proof to the now-well-proved accusation: In Portland, property rights belong to those who know the mayor -- or the chair of the Portland un-Development Commission.

I'm not a fan of these either, but I'm confused about WWP's comment. These are single-family homes, aren't they?

The 49 designs you saw were only those picked by a panel of architects. It is their choice of the 300 plus submissions that they considered to be the best design. These are their picks only and do not portend what will actually be built in neighborhoods. For the most part they would defeat the purpose of narrow houses because they are too expensive to build for the types of neighborhoods skinny houses go into.

We are now having a panel of citizens pick more practical designs that will fit the character of each neighborhood they are built in. I have seen those other designs and I will go out on a limb and predict you will be impressed by them...I was. They had names like "The Woodlawn", "The Kenton", etc. The names of those neighborhoods that describe the plans accurately reflect the old Portland character of each of those neighborhoods.

This entire effort will culminate in a pre-approved book of about 30 designs that will be houses that will be practical and efficient to build, yet will have a design that will meet or exceed the current character of the neighborhood it will be built in.

I have been criticized for not engaging in enough "process" when developing these kinds of initiatives. This is my attempt to make sure everyone who has an opinion on the subject of skinny houses gets their day and say. In the end, however, only functional, practical and attractive designs that fit the character of each individual neighborhood will be allowed in the design book at BDS.

Hard to see a how a 15-foot-wide house can "fit the character" of most older Portland neighborhoods I know. I don't care how it's dolled up.

I would listen to Jack's complaints if he ever offered a solution of his own.

My hats off to you Randy. At least someone on the City Council is trying to solve the problem of affordable housing in Portland.

Don't mind Jack, when it comes to housing he's a bit of a snob. This old timer (lived in Portland for 26 years) likes these homes. They allow my brothers, sisters and friends to purchase property in Portland, without going completely broke.

I'm neither for or against them but they seem a better idea then all the apartments they are putting in around Gresham.
At least they are single family homes.

Yes, b!X, of course they are single-family homes.

But then so are mobile homes in trailer parks.

They possess precisely the same charm, no matter how they are (as our host here puts it) "dolled up."

East coast represent, yo.

I wish that Portland had the foresight to protect/preserve the character of older neighborhoods. When I owned a lovely 1922 bungalow in North Carolina, I couldn't even paint it without approval from the Historic District Commission. Some people were angered by that, but it made for a truly beautiful neighborhood. There were a lot of great colors in the 20s.

My 1927 Spanish Mission in Portland is next to a 1970 brown piece of crap box that replaced a house that 'mysteriously' burned down.

I have a vision of the 1970 getting razed one day. I'll move an old beautiful home onto the property and restore it. Or maybe I'll make a garden, but please, no more INFILL.

Won't someone think of the CHILDREN?

once again, going after the housing changes in portland. i do agree a little - these aren't the same as what is currently there, but i would rather have a few 25ft lots with 15ft NEW homes with NEW owners than the horrible drug infested dog fight promoting crackden section 8 apartments accross the street. new homes - let me rephrase- new anything will attract and keep people who are willing to keep a neighborhood nice. old crappy stuff just gets older and crappier. when i lived accross from the famous Humbolt Elementary (the only grade school at the time with 18' fences) a new principal came in and repainted everything. as a result,the whole next year, there were only 2 incidences of vandelism.

i like portland and love what it is doing trying to re-vitalize neighborhoods. i ventured out to gresham the other day and was sickened by the amount of open space that was now taken up by apartments- places where I used to play in the forest as a child. i would rather see planned communities of HOMES than vast apartment fields.

Hey now WWP, don't go getting all snippy. The reason I asked, mostly rhetorically, was because you said this: "How could he not know that these New York exported Brownstones not rob the urban poor and middle class of the one and very single thing they have always hoped for: a single-family home in a single-family neighborhood."

Which sort of distorted away the fact that these are single-family homes.

I believe the dog fighting is happening at Blazer homes in Lake O.

Come on, Jack. Same old song and dance. Lots of whine, no cheese. What would YOU do? Other than roadblocks on I-5, of course, to keep people from moving to Portland. First you don't like condo towers of any type or location, now the single-family homes are too small and in the wrong place. Yikes.

I have one suggestion - the 15 foot wide houses are due to the 5-foot minimum setbacks on each lot. Why not make the setback on one side of the lot zero? They are called "zero lot-line houses," and were quite popular in the 1970's and 1980's. The part of the house on the lot line had no windows to break into the privacy of the neighboring lot. It usually was only one story too, so that the wall on the edge of the neighbor's property wasn't too tall. If two homes were being built together, then they could both have their zero lot lines butting up against each other, looking like a paired set of row houses. What's wrong with that?

The City could get a lot more design creativity if they jettisoned the five-foot setback requirement. Nonetheless, thank you Randy Leonard, for trying to make our city a place where single-family homes are welcomed in addition to condo towers. Don't listen to the doomsayers including, unfortunately, our host.

BDS should be commended for an innovative design competition. Few people nowadays can afford to buy a 10000sf lot with an old house anywhere in portland. Narrow lot design is a great alternative to rowhouses. Seriously, it unifies Portland with its beautiful sister pacific-rim cities like Tokyo, where narrow lots and small houses are typical. Randy Leonard should be commended for working to Tokyoize Portland's real estate, and also for working to bring research dollars to OHSU to reclone Mothra. Hopefully, the recloned Mothra will similarly help reduce urban sprawl ... to rubble.

"Baaaaaaaaaa," say all the sheep. "Let's let Randy Graaaaaaaaaaagg decide."

We could accommodate growth (to extent it deserves to be accommodated) and preserve the character of our neighborhoods by building nice but modest two- or three-story apartment buildings on neighborhood commercial streets such as Belmont, Morrison, Hawthorne, Division, and Fremont. We could also have created entire new neighborhoods of such buildings in places like the Pearl and North Macadam. Leave our beautiful neighborhoods with nice-sized lots alone.

Instead, we went for "luxury" condo towers, and now we're giving out awards for crowding junk into the old neighborhoods until every block feels cramped.

I don't think you're doing anybody a favor by selling them one of these crackerboxes (with no windows on one side, did you say?) for $150,000 and up.

The other thing that needs to be done is to make clear to California's lower middle class what residents and businesses who are here already know -- that this is one of the most expensive places in the country to live, and there's not much new decent-paying work here right now.

People will still come, but if we can't accommodate them without destroying what we have, at least we can say we warned them.

Did the growth that accommodated you, Jack, deserve to be accommodated? I don't know where one draws the line. Tom McCall tried and utterly failed to draw it some years back. I have watched this same "circle the wagons" attitude develop -- strongly -- among newcomers in Ashland and Bend. It seems clear that growth will continue in Portland, so it is a question of how, now whether. As far as the "how" goes, rant or carry on; but as far as the "whether," that's a lost and losing if not ironic cause.

The Bay Area still grows and is vastly overpriced. The economic differentials will still push people toward Portland, even though its affordability (housing vis-a-vis income) may actually be less.

Income differentials between the sectors (as divided into fifths) also increases, and more in Oregon than most other places, according to relatively recent studies.

All that said, I hated what city government has done to Portland in the last decade and what the immigration has brought and wrought. I left, and my family was from there at least dating to the early part of last century.

Professor Bogdanski,

I agree that we need to warn lower middle class Californians about the impending destruction of Portland. Might I add that spreading the word about Randy Leonard's efforts to unleash a recloned Mothra on Portland may also help discourage lower middle class Californians from migrating to Portland?

I live in NE PDX, but unlike Jack B. I live north of Fremont. That means when these narrow homes and rowhomes are built in my neighborhood, they fill lots that were vacant and littered with trash and drug debris, or replace decrepit, unrestorable houses. The effect, when these homes go in, is that (a) they immediately raise the property values of the older homes around them, and (b) young couples buy them, live in them, raise their kids in them, and start being better neighbors than were there before. This is the positive side of gentrification, one that really doesn't affect people who live in Irvington proper.

It's true that a poorly-done rowhouse is ugly, but a well-done rowhouse is a thing of beauty that fits and enhances the neighborhood. For the first type, see the RH development between Grand and 7th on the north side of Fremont; for the second, see the development on the south side of Skidmore between 11th and 12th. The first project surely doesn't hurt a blighted Fremont, the latter is a great enhancement built by an aesthetically sound and envronmentally responsible developer.

With all due respect, Jack, these are the only houses in these neighborhoods that are available at their price point, with the exception of a few 1970s monstrosities that beg for the wrecking ball. Why, again, are they objectively bad? It's understandable to react against change, but not in neighborhood that have needed change for decades.

These aren't rowhouses, Matt. They're skinny houses that turn a 75-foot lot into a 50- and a 25-. Or a 50- into two 25-s. We can do better, even in neighborhoods with blight.

If I'm not mistaken, didn't the city council reject the idea of tying an affordability requirement into the creation of these new skinny lots?

Good post, Matt. The last house I lived in in Portland was in north Portland. I started hating the city when I found out we were paying ten times higher property taxes than the nouveau riche in the Pearl. That, and Erik Sten's water bills.

These houses don't sound neaaaaaaaaaaar as bad as other things the city has done. 'Course, I live in a 17' wide house now (elsewhere), but it is on a 50' lot. It's a great house. One unit wide; three units deep; two stories. Built about 1900.

Portland really does have to choose between building up & closer together, or out.

(PS .... when did the problem become "lower middle-class" Californians? Maybe I'm stupid. Most looked relatively well off to me.)

The sad, sad thing is - Portlanders will have smaller houses than the Japanese do. The new 'houses' are technically larger...but not by much. Welcome to, Portland!

To put it another way, Portland is scrambling to build a non-movable version of a mobile home. "You know you're a redneck when...."

i agree with a couple of the posts - MattW - excellent post. Jack - what can we do better if not build homes? got any suggestions? you don't like the PDC, you don't like redevelopment. what do you want?

Don't fix things that aren't broke. And do some sensible things with land use, like reasonable height restrictions and minimum lot sizes. Thirty-story towers and 2000-square-foot lots are not what made Portland great. But that's what we're all about now.

Also, people need to realize that the "growth is inevitable, so let's be smart about it" mantra was cooked up by the developers and construction companies that year after year live off local taxpayer corporate welfare. At some point, Portland will have enough housing; it seems to me that Washington County is already overbuilt, and there are lots of relatively cheap vacancies out 185th way. But it will never be enough for these guys. They and their children will need to keep "developing" Portland until it's indistinguishable from Seattle, except for the lack of a decent economic base.

As for the PDC, to me they're all back room wheeler dealers, just like their patron saint, Neil G. I don't mind redevelopment, if it's not crooked.

Portland really does have to choose between building up & closer together, or out.

Sorry, I'm not buying. At a certain point, you have to say, we've built enough.

[W]hen did the problem become "lower middle-class" Californians? Maybe I'm stupid. Most looked relatively well off to me.

I think you haven't looked hard enough. How many of the people below the poverty line in Portland have been here less than five years? Anybody know?

I don't know how many people who are below the poverty line have been in Portland less than five years. I do know that the house I grew up in at 3132 NE 8th Ave. (one house from Irving Park) would be beyond my Parents financial grasp today.

The families I grew up around in inner NE Portland were garbage haulers, railroad workers, car repairmen, etc. Those families have been priced out of that neighborhood. Portland housing in neighborhoods such as I grew up in have become the enclave of white, upper income citizens. The melting pot I grew up in has, by and large, been displaced by "gentrification".

What caused this phenomenon of spiraling housing prices to occur after generations and generations of good affordable housing stock for working class Portlander's? Adoption by the Oregon Legislature in the early 70's of Senate Bill 100. Oregon's heralded, unique land use law which adopted an “urban growth boundary” for the first time in the United States. Its idea was to draw an invisible line around urban centers within Oregon outside of which it would be prohibited to build houses or commercial structures. The idea was to preserve farm land and forests from the “strip mall” development that was beginning to ruin rural areas around the United States.

One of the inevitable consequences was that with an impenetrable boundary outside of which houses could not be built, the fixed number of houses that existed within the City of Portland became more and more valuable. This is the perfect example of the basic economic theory of supply and demand. The effect is that we have priced people such as my parents out of the housing market in Portland’s traditionally working class neighborhoods.

I promised I would work to make housing more affordable for working class Portlander’s in all of Portland’s neighborhoods. If anyone has a strategy other than better designed narrow houses on 15 foot lots that does not relegate working class Portlander’s to apartment houses on main thoroughfares, I am open to your suggestions.

In the meantime, I will continue to try and balance good design with affordability so that working Portlander’s have a chance at the American dream.

I should have said:
15 foot wide houses on 25 foot wide lots.

The "affordability" card is such of pile of BS it's sickening...things might be all peachy north of Fremont but I know for a FACT that several perfectly good, ranch-style homes in the Roseway and Rose City Park neighborhoods of NE were snatched up and demoed for 3-4 25x100 lots underneath. Developers were going door-to-door and sending out mailings looking for a fast buck on an unsuspecting homeowner. A few of these fine upstanding citizens even contributed to Mr. Leonard's re-election campaign.

So it's a pretty nice deal for the bottom-feeding...err...affordable-housing conscious (yeah, right!) developer...spend $160,000 to $170,000 on a house, demo it, and build three skinny, crappy (yet affordable!) 15-foot wide homes, sell 'em for $130,000 to $140,000 a piece. Nice little profit.

It's one thing to demo derelict houses (as defined by housing code, not some nose-in-the-air psuedo-hipster wannabe)'s something altogether different to demo reasonably priced homes (e.g., $150,000 to $175,000) with NOTHING wrong with them so you can build three crappy ones in its place.

If that's what passes for an affordable housing (wreck one to get three) policy for this City, we are doomed.

Another example of our pitiful city leaders using the "ends justify the means" argument.

Interesting that NONE of these fine examples of affordable housing are being built in: Forest Heights, Sylvan Highlands, West Hills, Council Crest, Dunthorpe, etc...etc...

Also, for all the sheep out there...since I'm sure you are all strong advocates of the sustainability movement...what is the carrying capacity of the city? Does every square inch of the city need to be covered by asphalt and buildings? Welcome to Hong Kong....

This is a free country (well, at least it was before Ashcroft and Co. took over) can move where ever you please. Gosh, I'd like to live on the beach in San Diego or upstate New York on a nice idyllic farm, but I can't afford it. Too bad!

With all due respect, I'm not so sure it's the growth management act that is the problem, Randy. I, too, remember Portland as largely a working people and middle-class people's town. But I grew up mostly in the southwestern corner of the state, and I watched real estate prices rocket there beginning in 1970 with the immigration of Californians (from Reagan's California) who were playing with wildly and widely different numbers. (Medford, by the way, was recently named the most unaffordable city on the West Coast, housing costs vs. income levels.)

Portland stayed saner for longer by a good bit. I won't even name the city that's left to be wholly swallowed.

But I don't know how or if one (or many) can fight that. And stopping it is no longer the impetus. The drive now is to recruit growth -- of population, at any rate.

Jack, the problem I have when I hear, "At a certain point, you have to say, we've built enough," is hearing the call for the wagons to be circled now -- by the newcomers some of us (as I have said before) didn't want. I guess it just doesn't work that way. This is what I have seen (or read of) in Ashland and Bend.

Those I saw moving in were largely better off, or with larger equity cash-outs at hand. That is what caused housing to so inflate, don't you think? I can't see it any other way. And it is still very much happening.

As to how many of newcomers are relatively poor, I do not know. When you tell me to look harder, I was looking from a relatively low point, so most of what I saw was up. I saw the kids on the street and the assortments of young people recruited to the country's new cool cultural Mecca, and I suppose a large number of them would rank in that sector, but a large number of those are educated and merely young, not really at relative disadvantage (except for getting jobs, which anyone looking was). I was last living in Sullivan's Gulch, near you geographically but I never saw a house in Irvington I understood how anyone anymore could afford.

Neighborhoods all over Portland have become expensive in the last decade, and some -- like that ghastly Pearl District horror -- are obscene. (Not "Portland," either. If that isn't some semi-$ilicon Valley fantasy, I do not what is.) I got out of Portland because I felt I would have to stay too poor to stay there. So it's personal with me.

At any rate, I don't see Portland's problems as the growth boundaries or neighborhood preservation per se, but rather the economic lines of divide that make most of those old neighborhoods unaffordable to most people.

I'd just as soon City Hall get out of housing & economic development altogether. I'm not sure it's city government business, and I'm pretty sure it isn't done cleanly or well, the best intentions of the only councillor I liked notwithstanding.

If anyone has a strategy other than better designed narrow houses on 15 foot lots that does not relegate working class Portlander’s to apartment houses on main thoroughfares, I am open to your suggestions.

Randy, I didn't know you were such a socialist!

Maybe they'll knock down your parents' old house and put up two of these beauties that you're selling. Is that what you want?

I know it's what the real estate sharpies want...

My parents sold the house I grew up in on NE 8th in 1972 for $16,000. It was for sale this past summer for $325,000 (a bargain I was told). Incomes have not gone up the same 20 times in that same time period.

Randy: By that logic, we ought to build some houses that someone could buy for the 2004 equivalent of $16,000 in 1972 dollars. Here's an example.

"Maybe they'll knock down your parents' old house and put up two of these beauties that you're selling."

Typically houses that have been razed and replaced by two narrow houses have been in varying states of disrepair or on vacant lots. No one would tear down a house that was viable to sell. It does not make economic sense. For an example, the house I grew up in was for sale this past summer for $325,000. A bargain I was told because the garage had been torn down and it needed updating. There is no way it would make economic sense to tear down that house and replace it with two brand new 15 foot wide houses. Notwithstanding earlier comments, this is a market driven phenomena that creates more affordable housing than what is available normally. However, a vacant lot in my old neighborhood could be an example of where two narrow houses are built. I completely agree that the kinds of boxes built prior to this effort to build better designed narrow houses would be totally unacceptable in my old 'hood. I have always understood that legitimate criticism. I do believe that the designs we will publish soon will be accepted as compliments to neighborhoods....not eye sores.

And as far as my socialist leanings go, can we just keep that our secret?

Randy, wasn't that my point? In all that verbiage did I fail to make it?

Cute place, Jack. See why I had to skedaddle?

OK, that's enough for one day.

Jack you are a walking contradiction. On one hand, you spit venom at anyone who makes money, has money, contributes money, receives contributions, or loses money. On the other hand, you reprimand the random leader who tries to accomodate those who have little money. I'm not saying those houses look good by any means, in fact I would say all of Commissioner Leonard's taste is in his mouth. But at least he is coming at it for the right reasons.

You on the other hand can't decide if there is anyone you like. You hate the rich, you hate the poor. Pick a team old boy!

Sally: Portland really does have to choose between building up & closer together, or out. Jack: Sorry, I'm not buying. At a certain point, you have to say, we've built enough.

Sorry, Jack, love ya, but you're wrong here. You actually don't get to choose to stop growing. The growth just appears auto-magically. Even if (even if!) we could stop all the in-migration, you'd still have to deal with all those babies growing up and turning 18 and wanting to move out of Mom and Dad's house.

You can't stop the new people, so you're left with two choices: Density or Sprawl. That's it. There are no other choices. It's simple math. Density equals Population divided by Land Area. If Population goes up, you must either increase Density - or increase Land Area.

(Side thought: Of course, you and I could get out of the higher education business - that's a huge magnetic people-attractor. That would help.)

Croix: Rich, poor, I don't care. Tasteless, ugly, and/or dishonest, I care.

Kari, sorry, I know this is what you learned, but you're wrong. You can stop some of the new people, and given the no-tax, no-public-services climate of this state, it's immoral not to try. You certainly shouldn't be encouraging folks to come here, since there's no job for them and all the costs of living (not just housing) are at or near the tops of the charts.

Until very recently, there was a no-growth group run by Andy Kerr, one of the original 1000 Friends of Oregon. But when the sound of all the "sustainable," "smart growth," blah blah blah sheep got too loud, they packed it in.

If you give up on slowing growth down by using supply and demand, you're doomed to permanent overcrowding, lousier schools, worse roads, etc. And when people get tired of the blight of condo towers and these modern equivalents of shotgun shacks, they'll move to a McMansion in the suburbs. Which I thought is what Portland was hoping to prevent.

"If you give up on slowing growth down by using supply and demand, you're doomed to permanent overcrowding, lousier schools, worse roads, etc. And when people get tired of the blight of condo towers and these modern equivalents of shotgun shacks, they'll move to a McMansion in the suburbs. Which I thought is what Portland was hoping to prevent."

Nice picture, and compelling. But you are trying to do now what those like Andy Kerr & Tom McCall and my friends & family tried to do then. See why I keep asking where & when you draw the line? I'll side with Kari now. You can't stop it, and I don't care.

(Not all the old "shotguns" were shacks, by the way. Some were Victorians. And I still think the economic and tax disparities in the state are its greatest problem now. And that the in-migrating rich are chasing out the middle & poor. And that city government hugely sides with the former and should cease economically pandering to the first and pretending to help the second. But that is a fantasy I will watch from a state away.)

What does economic viability mean to a 200 ton moth that flies at Mach 3? Nothing! Mothra's redevelopment plan for Irvington - north and south of Freemont - contemplates TOTAL DESTRUCTION. I think all will agree with Randy Leonard that such uniform treatment is fair.

I wish I got that joke. Like a lot of things about Portland, it seems an inside one.

A Goo-gle search for "Mothra" takes 0.22 seconds and generates about 82,000 results, including this nice summary. A quote:

Mothra's origin is not well known. She was the guardian of an ancient race of tiny humanoids named the Cosmos who lived on earth. The Cosmos civilization became very advanced but the Zen of Earth Lifeforce created Battra to kill Mothra and wipe out the Cosmos. Although Mothra defeated Battra, the civilization of the Cosmos still crumbled and Mothra lay dormant for many years. In 1992 she hatches from an egg when Godzilla and Battra threaten Japan.

Pardone the hyphen in Goo-gle--Jack's comment sanitizer won't let me spell it correctly.


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Lange, Pinot Gris 2015
Kiona, Lemberger 2014
Willamette Valley, Pinot Gris 2015
Aix, Rosé de Provence 2016
MarchigĂĽe, Cabernet 2013
Inazío Irruzola, Getariako Txakolina Rosé 2015
Maso Canali, Pinot Grigio 2015
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Kirkland, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2016
Cantele, Salice Salentino Reserva 2013
Whispering Angel, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2013
Avissi, Prosecco
Cleto Charli, Lambrusco di Sorbara Secco, Vecchia Modena
Pique Poul, Rosé 2016
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Rosé 2016
Stoller, Pinot Noir Rosé 2016
Chehalem, Inox Chardonnay 2015
The Four Graces, Pinot Gris 2015
GascĂłn, Colosal Red 2013
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
L'Ecole No. 41, Merlot 2013
Della Terra, Anonymus
Willamette Valley, Dijon Clone Chardonnay 2013
Wraith, Cabernet, Eidolon Estate 2012
Januik, Red 2015
Tomassi, Valpolicella, Rafaél, 2014
Sharecropper's Pinot Noir 2013
Helix, Pomatia Red Blend 2013
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2013
Locations, Spanish Red Wine
Locations, Argentinian Red Wine
La Antigua Clásico, Rioja 2011
Shatter, Grenache, Maury 2012
Argyle, Vintage Brut 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16 Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2014
Benton Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
Primarius, Pinot Gris 2015
Januik, Merlot 2013
Napa Cellars, Cabernet 2013
J. Bookwalter, Protagonist 2012
LAN, Rioja Edicion Limitada 2011
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2009
Denada Cellars, Cabernet, Maipo Valley 2014
MarchigĂĽe, Cabernet, Colchagua Valley 2013
Oberon, Cabernet 2014
Hedges, Red Mountain 2012
Balboa, Rose of Grenache 2015
Ontañón, Rioja Reserva 2015
Three Horse Ranch, Pinot Gris 2014
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
Nelms Road, Merlot 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris 2014
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2012
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2013
Villa Maria, Sauvignon Blanc 2015
G3, Cabernet 2013
Chateau Smith, Cabernet, Washington State 2014
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16
Willamette Valley, Rose of Pinot Noir, Whole Clusters 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Ca' del Baio Barbaresco Valgrande 2012
Goodfellow, Reserve Pinot Gris, Clover 2014
Lugana, San Benedetto 2014
Wente, Cabernet, Charles Wetmore 2011
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2015
Adelsheim, Pinot Gris 2015
Trader Joe's, Pinot Gris, Willamette Valley 2015
La Vite Lucente, Toscana Red 2013
St. Francis, Cabernet, Sonoma 2013
Kendall-Jackson, Pinot Noir, California 2013
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2013
Erath, Pinot Noir, Estate Selection 2012
Abbot's Table, Columbia Valley 2014
Intrinsic, Cabernet 2014
Oyster Bay, Pinot Noir 2010
Occhipinti, SP68 Bianco 2014
Layer Cake, Shiraz 2013
Desert Wind, Ruah 2011
WillaKenzie, Pinot Gris 2014
Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2013
Des Amis, Rose 2014
Dunham, Trautina 2012
RoxyAnn, Claret 2012
Del Ri, Claret 2012
Stoppa, Emilia, Red 2004
Primarius, Pinot Noir 2013
Domaines Bunan, Bandol Rose 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Deer Creek, Pinot Gris 2015
Beaulieu, Rutherford Cabernet 2013
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
King Estate, Pinot Gris, Backbone 2014
Oberon, Napa Cabernet 2013
Apaltagua, Envero Carmenere Gran Reserva 2013
Chateau des Arnauds, Cuvee des Capucins 2012
Nine Hats, Red 2013
Benziger, Cabernet, Sonoma 2012
Roxy Ann, Claret 2012
Januik, Merlot 2012
Conundrum, White 2013
St. Francis, Sonoma Cabernet 2012

The Occasional Book

Marc Maron - Waiting for the Punch
Phil Stanford - Rose City Vice
Kenneth R. Feinberg - What is Life Worth?
Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
Peter Carey - True History of the Kelly Gang
Suzanne Collins - The Hunger Games
Amy Stewart - Girl Waits With Gun
Philip Roth - The Plot Against America
Norm Macdonald - Based on a True Story
Christopher Buckley - Boomsday
Ryan Holiday - The Obstacle is the Way
Ruth Sepetys - Between Shades of Gray
Richard Adams - Watership Down
Claire Vaye Watkins - Gold Fame Citrus
Markus Zusak - I am the Messenger
Anthony Doerr - All the Light We Cannot See
James Joyce - Dubliners
Cheryl Strayed - Torch
William Golding - Lord of the Flies
Saul Bellow - Mister Sammler's Planet
Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria DermoČ—t - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 5
At this date last year: 3
Total run in 2017: 113
In 2016: 155
In 2015: 271
In 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269

Clicky Web Analytics