"The city that works for developers."

Oh great, low income housing.

Wooden framing, non fire treated, 5 story and higher buildings.

Sort of brings up the question "What about the children" living there.

Grampy, are you listening?

complaning about developers in the city with less bending to developers than 90% of the rest of thee country makes little sense. You might as well complain about the small store of road salt on hand in Miami.

Marky,

We could be complaning about thee spelling "issues" you seeem to have.

Get back to work!

also, it's a stretch to say the city is violating anything; they're working from a state approved amendment viable into 2007.

And you try commenting from a mobile keypad without a typo.

But the stupid, offbase personal barb let's
me know you've no other rebuttal.

Hmm ... so "torridjoe" what kind of "mobile keypad" do you have and out of curiosity, who paid for it? What are you doing that is mobile and at the same time you surf the Bog Blog?

Stupid is such a harsh word. It let's me know you're evading the issue.

If only you could appreciate the difference between a "barb" (as you correctly term it) and calling a comment "stupid".

It's very like the difference between a typo and a grammatical error.

Too much to ask, I suppose.

Ah, "torridjoe." Always brings out the best in everyone.

I'm still trying to figure out which is greener ? wood or steel

I'm pretty sure the Arlington Club was built with wood, as are most of the luxury homes in Portland. If it's good enough for the good ol' boys....

That said, I'm sure the incidence of fire is much higher in multi-family housing than single family residential.

So long as the new construction is built within bragging distance of light rail or streetcars, they would approve a yurt if necessary to induce the condo whores.

Isn't it ironic? Because of this blog, torridjoe has no keyboard tray, causing him to commit a spelling glitch that makes the whole thread come unravelled.

I'm interested in torridjoe substantiating his claim that Portland bends less to the demands of developers than 90% of the rest of the country.

Please provide the source of that dubious claim.

I suspect that torridjoe is driving around in his oversized SUV reading and keying while he's driving.

Y'know, I plead guilty to participating in the unraveling. But when you take the narrow view of a broad subject and try to wrest the topic to your own uses with your obtuseness, you take your chances that others might do the same.

Fair game, say I.

(No public money was spent on this comment)

PS:BS

that's not a nice thing to say about your host--sure he takes an obtusely narrow view of the subject of building codes, but must you point that out? Maybe you're just better off trying to intimidate me with your anti-public biases...although that won't be very effective, either. For one thing, the mobile is personal.

As for substantiation of the point, duh--it was not a citation of a statistic, but the obvious grasp of reality. Any city that doesn't let its developers do whatever they want, is going to be ahead of the vast number of cities that give them carte blanche. But somebody's got to make up their mind--is business being stifled by the unfriendly regs climate, or are they getting special, lax treatment?