What are we looking at in that bottom picture? I thought they installed these on power poles, but that photo gave me the impression they were about to erect a gigantic tower in that yard or something. Is it a shed for the fiber hookup and rack equipment? What will it look like when it's done?

Question is why would the city codes allow this?

Will this become a ubiquitous scene in our neighborhoods?

Did property taxes become so taxing that people may be forced to sell/rent off parcels of their yards for whatever?

What next? Allow those little "mine/micro" houses to be built in every spare spot there is in the city? I might add only in some neighborhoods.

Aaron--I think the cell phone companies have realized there are fewer hurdles to overcome if you build it on private land and get the consent of the landowner. Thus, some guy who doesn't care about his neighbors and who wants to make a buck or two can just lease land to the cell phone companies, and everyone else can go pound sand.

Aaron -- go walk up to a cell tower and examine the infrastructure at the base of it. It's not just an ugly stick. Some even have back-up generators. Some companies do a good job of disguising the top of the tower as a palm tree or a conifer, but the gadgets at the bottom are tougher to hide.

At the very least, all of the support electronics and power should live in this guy's garage...or his living room.

I understand and can imagine a bit of what goes along with a cell tower, I was just trying to figure out if an actual tower is going in here and if that's what is pictured. They say in one of the linked articles it's going on a power pole. It looks to me more like some kind of miniature pole-barn structure in the photo.

Let he who is without a cellphone and/or never mutters curses at a dropped call cast the first stone.

What's pictured is where the related equipment (big, bulky, and noisy) is going to go. The antennas will be going on a tall telephone pole nearby.

How much more would it really cost to underground that crap?

Quite a bit I suspect, and then you would still have to have some A/C equipment above ground to keep the underground room cool. Not to mention the expense of protecting it from flooding.

Yes, it should have gone in the backyard. But cell phone towers have to go someplace because we now depend on mobile phones. It would be nice if the wireless companies were consistent about minimizing the intrusion. A very few are well hidden or camoflaged, especially in sensitive neighborhoods.

Jack , it is not his front yard , but his side yard on Prescott st. It is a back unusable area on his lot , on a loud street full of trimet busses.
As everyone uses Cells and wants perfect coverage , you have to put these thing somewhere. For everyone using your phone in his neighborhood , he is doing you a favor.

Situations like this make me think those who are stealing metal railings from freeways, stealing A/C units, and tearing them apart for the precious metal inside are doing society a favor. It is one thing to paint your house neon green or have offensive, near pornographic art on your front yard, but to sell off your front yard for commercial gain with absolutely no regard for your immediate community is abhorrent.

Abhorrent because it is the ultimate middle finger, my castle is my Brazilian villa type move. No regard for others and I would not be surprised if the guy who is doing this is one of those old foggies who dashes out his front door with his shotgun and mean words when a neighbor walking their dog approaches his priceless, pathetic green grass.

As this economy gets worse, I expect the metal thieves to start going after electric substations and the base equipment at the bottom of cell phone towers.

If some metal thieves steal enough to make that cell phone tower fall on his house, oh the sweet ironic justice it would be.

his side yard on Prescott st.

If it's on a street, it's not what I'd call a "side yard." The guy's on a corner.

Bill, he also has the same last name as you. Perhaps that affects your view of what he's doing, just a little.

What would you call a "side yard" then? Yes he lives on a corner, but the front of his house is on the other street. (As it appears most other houses are including the neighbor with a house on the same block face.)

Also, I wouldn't say they screwed up the permit process, they got that all right, and then somebody drop the ball and forgot to start construction before it expired. Oops. (Somebody is going to pay for that.)

A side yard is a yard that faces an adjoining property and does not abut the sidewalk.

I would call a "side yard" an area of your property that is not adjacent to the front entry or rear of your house.

If its legal to put it there, so be it. He is no doubt paying the outrageous Mult. County property taxes that he does for his right to do with HIS property as he wishes within the zoning laws. I see no reason to vilify him for it. I've had more than a couple friends in this economy that have had to walk away from from there homes due to this train wreck of an economy. If Bruce did this for the money and its legal, more power to him.

Jack according to zoning code 33.910 in Definitions under "Lot Lines":

"Front Lot line. A lot line that abuts a street. On a corner lot, the front lot is the shortes of the lot lines which abut a street. If two or more street lot lines are of equal length, then the applicant can choose which lot line is to be the front."

This then makes the remaining sides of a lot either "side yards" or "rear yards"

Then, after that decision is made then each zoning category, like R5 which I suspect it is, has setbacks and other requirements for each category-front, side yard and rear yards.

Who cares? He's screwing up other people's front yards. The point is, this guy is a neighbor from hell. Discuss.

I know I shouldn't judge people on their appearances, but I really want to walk up to this guy and quote Garth Ennis: "Where the F@@@ is your chin?"

But if it was a chicken coop it would be OK. Keep Portland Weird.