One of the selling points of Portland's absurd South Waterfront district, back in the days when Vera and Opie and Homer roamed City Hall with Fireman Randy and Sam the Tram, was that a goodly amount of the housing built down there was going to be "affordable." Skeptics suspected that the real agenda was a bunch of high-rise condo towers, and that all the other promises that were being made about a diverse neighborhood (and a biotech center) were a snow job.
Guess who was right.
Millions upon millions of public money has been spent toward developing low-income and middle-class housing down in SoWhat, but those units seem less likely to be built today than they were even back before the industrial jobs in the district were run out for the condo clowns.
The League of Women Voters has got it exactly right. Like quite a few astute observers, they've been watching the SoWhat debacle from the beginning, and now they'd like some proof that what was promised when this area was cleared out for ugly high-rises wasn't just a straight-out lie. Such a showing is not likely to be forthcoming.
Meanwhile, some of the same culprits who led the city down the destructive path of SoWhat are now salivating over county property near the Morrison Bridge, which they're saying they want to develop into a Pike Place-type public market, with commercial offices or high-end apartments up above. Just what Portland needs -- more downtown retail, empty offices, and vacant apartments! Of all the delusional communities on our planet, some days this one takes the cake.
Comments (18)
The "condo clowns" carried the flag on this, but the voters should also own up about their selection of public officials.
"they want to develop into a Pike Place-type public market"
That ought to make it totally soulless.
Then again, maybe Great Father and Dear Leader neon=art=neon Leonard can spend $500K to find the right kind of trash piece to give it back its Porltand wierdness.
I guess we can see the next place where their trying to inflate property values by throwing every spare bit of taxpayer money at the developers.
Oregon has spent 100 million dollars on planning for the Columbia River Crossing, and they are no closer to getting it built than they were before the 100 million was spent.
Which makes me wonder, how much money could Oregon and Portland save if they just put a moratorium on any new development for one year. No new studies, no new plans, no consultants, just take a year break and focus on the basics of city government: repairing potholes, picking up garbage and shooting unarmed black men. (I kid. I kid.)
I hear you Justin. The city is currently undertaking a study to figure out where to create a new Urban Renewal district. The study area includes everything from the NW industrial area to PSU, and from the River up to Goose Hollow.
We really need to get over this strange idea we have that every corner of the city must be "renewed". First of all, it's impossible. There is only so much development that can happen in any city, especially one with a limited economy like ours.
Second, different parts of the city serve different purposes. Some of them may not look perfect, and yuppies may not want to hang out there, but that doesn't mean they're broken and not filling a niche.
Third, the city and PDC and metro greatly overestimate the ability of the public sector to generate development. Development is a private sector activity. That's why we get the impression that developers are steering these processes and telling the city where they want to build next, "so could you please create Urban Renewal and other huge subsidies for us." It's because they are steering it.
The Block 33 Affordable Housing issue changes were present by PDC staff in the January URAC meeting in a two minute briefing. Not one comment was made by any stakeholders serving on the URAC. But a motion was made with a comment for opposition to abandoning Housing for Block 33, and especially the PDC investing $6 Million dollars in air rights and future parking and only getting $4 Million back and not even the interest on the $6 Million invested over 4 years ago. No one offered a second for a vote.
That is how business is done in Portland- select a "citizen" advisory committee with almost all directly benefited property owners, called "stakeholders" then let them review a critical component of the whole URA and not get one comment or vote.
Why aren't the citizens of Portland fairly represented on decisions of this magnitude that also costs taxpayers so much, like over $2.5 Million lost? That's not small change.
yuk yuk 'dubai on the willamette' good one!
Still with global warming , it will turn into Venice on the Willamette. but I love garbage filled smelly canals , i'm funny that way. + some of the buried
bodies will pop up from the shallow graves of SOWHAT....
Im pretty sure the new max line through there will spur some kind of heavily subsidized apartment complex with affordable $800/month 300 sq ft studios.
How about two years, "no new anything" budget. No development, no new transportation projects, nothing new. Just maintain the existing infrastructure and services. That would extend to no new CityFleet vehicles, no new police cars, no new fire trucks, no new water line extensions to subdivisions, no new parks...
All this incompetance and corruption is mind boggling. My only comfort is that somewhere there is a bitter, former insider who knows where all the skeletons are hidden and is collaborating with Phil Stanford on a whopping political tell-all.
Eric,
I like your idea of “no new nothing” for two years.
We would be wise to just have a breather to evaluate what has taken place in our city and take care of basic problems.
We do not need continuous planning and changes until we don't recognize our city anymore.
The frenzy of questionable projects and decisions in our city have caused some of us to wonder week after week what insane matter or project we will be witnessing next. This is in my opinion not normal, but abusive.
The reaction to this story is all wrong. We should be cheering this decision, not criticizing it.
Remember, the whole point of urban renewal is to increase the property tax base by increasing property values. The 30% affordable housing set-aside was on of Commissioner Sten's stupid ideas. It simply doesn't make any sense to develop affordable housing in a URA, because even if affordable housing is subject to property taxes, it is never going to be the highest and best use, so it will never produce the maximum amount of property tax revenues.
Moreover, the mere presence of affordable housing in the district will further reduce the value of surrounding properties, which further reduces property tax revenues, because rich people simply don't want to share their living environment with poor people, especially poor veterans with "issues." Imagine how you'd feel with 400 mentally-ill former soldiers living a block away. I don't want my wife to ever ride an elevator with a potentially violent veteran with PTSD. Would anyone want that? Imagine the neighborhood exodus that would follow the first incident of violence.
It's easy to criticize decisions like this as lies - which they are - but the real world chugs on, lies or not. As a matter of fact, rich people don't want to subject their families to social experiments like this.
Even if you want to quash such NIMBY-ism, everyone should agree that the best time for affordable housing development is at the end of the URA's lifetime, to maximize property taxes.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
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: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run 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
Comments (18)
The "condo clowns" carried the flag on this, but the voters should also own up about their selection of public officials.
Posted by David E Gilmore | February 26, 2010 6:12 AM
"they want to develop into a Pike Place-type public market"
That ought to make it totally soulless.
Then again, maybe Great Father and Dear Leader neon=art=neon Leonard can spend $500K to find the right kind of trash piece to give it back its Porltand wierdness.
I guess we can see the next place where their trying to inflate property values by throwing every spare bit of taxpayer money at the developers.
Posted by Steve | February 26, 2010 7:11 AM
Oregon has spent 100 million dollars on planning for the Columbia River Crossing, and they are no closer to getting it built than they were before the 100 million was spent.
Which makes me wonder, how much money could Oregon and Portland save if they just put a moratorium on any new development for one year. No new studies, no new plans, no consultants, just take a year break and focus on the basics of city government: repairing potholes, picking up garbage and shooting unarmed black men. (I kid. I kid.)
Posted by Justin | February 26, 2010 8:09 AM
I like Justin's moratorium idea.
Posted by Mike D | February 26, 2010 8:37 AM
Ditto that about Justin.
Posted by Drew G. | February 26, 2010 10:16 AM
I hear you Justin. The city is currently undertaking a study to figure out where to create a new Urban Renewal district. The study area includes everything from the NW industrial area to PSU, and from the River up to Goose Hollow.
We really need to get over this strange idea we have that every corner of the city must be "renewed". First of all, it's impossible. There is only so much development that can happen in any city, especially one with a limited economy like ours.
Second, different parts of the city serve different purposes. Some of them may not look perfect, and yuppies may not want to hang out there, but that doesn't mean they're broken and not filling a niche.
Third, the city and PDC and metro greatly overestimate the ability of the public sector to generate development. Development is a private sector activity. That's why we get the impression that developers are steering these processes and telling the city where they want to build next, "so could you please create Urban Renewal and other huge subsidies for us." It's because they are steering it.
Posted by Snards | February 26, 2010 10:43 AM
The Block 33 Affordable Housing issue changes were present by PDC staff in the January URAC meeting in a two minute briefing. Not one comment was made by any stakeholders serving on the URAC. But a motion was made with a comment for opposition to abandoning Housing for Block 33, and especially the PDC investing $6 Million dollars in air rights and future parking and only getting $4 Million back and not even the interest on the $6 Million invested over 4 years ago. No one offered a second for a vote.
That is how business is done in Portland- select a "citizen" advisory committee with almost all directly benefited property owners, called "stakeholders" then let them review a critical component of the whole URA and not get one comment or vote.
Why aren't the citizens of Portland fairly represented on decisions of this magnitude that also costs taxpayers so much, like over $2.5 Million lost? That's not small change.
Posted by Lee | February 26, 2010 11:28 AM
Lighten up guys! When those thirty thousand biotech jobs kick in we'll be rolling in the dough!
Posted by Robert Collins | February 26, 2010 11:38 AM
It's Dubai on the Willamette
Posted by tom | February 26, 2010 1:21 PM
I'd be very much in favor of a giant neon bald Randy Leonard sign conspicuously adorning the front of the Market.
Posted by Gen. Ambrose Burnside, Ret. | February 26, 2010 1:28 PM
yuk yuk 'dubai on the willamette' good one!
Still with global warming , it will turn into Venice on the Willamette. but I love garbage filled smelly canals , i'm funny that way. + some of the buried
bodies will pop up from the shallow graves of SOWHAT....
Posted by billb | February 26, 2010 3:19 PM
Im pretty sure the new max line through there will spur some kind of heavily subsidized apartment complex with affordable $800/month 300 sq ft studios.
Posted by Anthony | February 26, 2010 4:15 PM
How about two years, "no new anything" budget. No development, no new transportation projects, nothing new. Just maintain the existing infrastructure and services. That would extend to no new CityFleet vehicles, no new police cars, no new fire trucks, no new water line extensions to subdivisions, no new parks...
Posted by Erik H. | February 26, 2010 9:14 PM
Right on Erik H., AND how about no new staff positions in Mayor Zsa Zsa's office too!
Posted by RANZ | February 27, 2010 12:28 PM
All this incompetance and corruption is mind boggling. My only comfort is that somewhere there is a bitter, former insider who knows where all the skeletons are hidden and is collaborating with Phil Stanford on a whopping political tell-all.
Posted by notjustforlooks | February 27, 2010 12:30 PM
Eric,
I like your idea of “no new nothing” for two years.
We would be wise to just have a breather to evaluate what has taken place in our city and take care of basic problems.
We do not need continuous planning and changes until we don't recognize our city anymore.
The frenzy of questionable projects and decisions in our city have caused some of us to wonder week after week what insane matter or project we will be witnessing next. This is in my opinion not normal, but abusive.
Posted by clinamen | February 27, 2010 1:15 PM
Just give SoWhat some time. Soon enough, all of the housing will be "affordable".
Posted by MJ | March 1, 2010 9:39 AM
The reaction to this story is all wrong. We should be cheering this decision, not criticizing it.
Remember, the whole point of urban renewal is to increase the property tax base by increasing property values. The 30% affordable housing set-aside was on of Commissioner Sten's stupid ideas. It simply doesn't make any sense to develop affordable housing in a URA, because even if affordable housing is subject to property taxes, it is never going to be the highest and best use, so it will never produce the maximum amount of property tax revenues.
Moreover, the mere presence of affordable housing in the district will further reduce the value of surrounding properties, which further reduces property tax revenues, because rich people simply don't want to share their living environment with poor people, especially poor veterans with "issues." Imagine how you'd feel with 400 mentally-ill former soldiers living a block away. I don't want my wife to ever ride an elevator with a potentially violent veteran with PTSD. Would anyone want that? Imagine the neighborhood exodus that would follow the first incident of violence.
It's easy to criticize decisions like this as lies - which they are - but the real world chugs on, lies or not. As a matter of fact, rich people don't want to subject their families to social experiments like this.
Even if you want to quash such NIMBY-ism, everyone should agree that the best time for affordable housing development is at the end of the URA's lifetime, to maximize property taxes.
Posted by oh, nobody | March 2, 2010 11:36 AM