""Aaron Brown, a resident of the Boise neighborhood and one of few apartment-dwellers to testify, said requiring parking would limit housing options."

From the Portland Afoot blog:

"Aaron Brown is a Portland-based active transportation advocate. He has worked for Metro and The Intertwine and prepared Portland Afoot's 2012 low-car voter guide for transit riders to use in local elections."

In other words, he is a ringer.

What a screwed-up town.

What a screwed-up town.

~~~>That about sums it up!

There is nothing in Oregon's 19 Planning Goals that requires "no parking" for any zoning, let alone C and CX zoning. That is simply bogus. Don't buy SuperPlanner Zehnder's trite claim that the State requires such. And if so, then why do other Oregon cities don't necessarily require it?

Since it was a process of the then Planning Bureau, Planning Commission and ultimately the City Council that placed the "no parking requirement", then it can be changed by the same parties. Since elect Mayor Hales was a major contributor to the "no parking" requirement, then he should lead the reappraisal of the issue, and very soon.

All the city neighborhood associations should collectively come down hard on this issue, because many will be affected now and in the near future by the "no parking" edicts.

Zehnder, like Anderson, must go. Nice gigs with Homer Williams and Eco-somehting-or-other are waiting.

Aaron Brown:

""poor twenty-something who doesn't own a car and probably never will, let alone a house."

I'd also point out that Mr. Brown majored in "Government Administration" at an extremely expensive Midwestern liberal arts college, according to his Linked In profile linked at the Portland Afoot blog.

Yeah, he's going to stay poor all his life, and he's **never** going to own a car.

And the architect who wants everyone to exercise patience, because we can't be just like Brooklyn overnight....Brooklyn? We want to be like Brooklyn? Let's see, I was in Brooklyn a few months back and found most amusing the lines of double-parked cars stretching for many blocks, in a giant F-U gesture to the traffic enforcement bodies.

And please, let's not remember the omnipresent parallel societies of cockroaches in our rental apartment in the chic restaurant district.
Indeed, we want to be just like Brooklyn, and share a 600 square foot imprint with the cockroaches. Please be patient while our goal is being reached....

"Aaron Brown, a resident of the Boise neighborhood and one of few apartment-dwellers to testify, said requiring parking would limit housing options."

Okay, so what am I missing? HOW does requiring parking limiting housing options? Uh, because there would be less room to build more bunkers? Or ... what?

No, wait, I figured it out, I'm trying to use logic on a statement that is completely and totally illogical ... silly me.

Let's go ghetto!

Great expression!
Need to take a tour into some areas of town to see the real deal!
Does this planning cabal really believe what they are doing, or are they promoting this as a way of keeping their jobs?
I imagine the political correct way is to say, I like density, but not so quickly?
In my opinion, we are too much in the mode that Bill has written about, "Portland Polite."
They count on it, and the least little sign shown of not approving, Fish gets upset about not getting respect at council hearings. He has gone along with this council and since not up for election now, a recall may be in order.

Sam established this committee and this Bureau. Can the next mayor change just as easily change it again and eliminate those who have an anti-resident perspective?

Of course he won't, but I just wonder how much of the crazy stuff that Sam did can be reversed?

Sam is such a twit.

So if you cater to the have nots (poor 20 somethings), and their slice of the population grows, who do you tax?

This was the psychobabble memo that announced the PSC commission 6/10/2010 as it was linked on Jack's Blog.

I now realize that defending the developers of these crap apartments must be the "equity awareness" they were crowing about
http://bojack.org/2010/06/this_weeks_portland_planning_b.html

"The City of Portland has proposed a new Planning and Sustainability Commission (PSC) as a means to ensure sustainability principles and practices are incorporated into policy, planning and development decisions. The PSC will build on the work of the Portland Planning Commission and the Sustainable Development Commission.

Today, Portland may lead the nation in creative planning and sustainability programs and projects, but we know there is much work to be done to keep our leadership position. In response, a year-and-a-half ago, City Council adopted a new approach, bringing together the Bureau of Planning and the Office of Sustainable Development, creating the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability. This bureau makes Portland distinct from other cities and helps ensure that sustainability is an integral part of all long-range planning and management of the City.

Similar innovations and synergies can be expected from creating the PSC.By bringing the two commissions together, Portland continues to take an integrated approach to looking at long-range planning through a sustainability-focused lens. In addition to environmental, economic and community sustainability, the PSC will ensure equity awareness is incorporated into planning decisions as well.

In the near-term, the Planning and Sustainability Commission will be tasked with guiding the development and future implementation of the Portland Plan, the City’s 25-year strategic plan, as well as monitoring the implementation of The City of Portland has proposed a new Planning and Sustainability Commission (PSC) as a means to ensurePortland’s Climate Action Plan that Council adopted in 2009.

The new Commission will have 11 members. Many of those positions will likely be filled by existing Planning Commission and Sustainable Development Commission members. Individuals interested in applying for one of the remaining seats will be able to do so beginning on June 21.

Interested applicants should visit the Office of Neighborhood Involvement website for more details and to fill out an application form."

Let's just say that it has been a gravy train, lots of gravy for some and then a bit dribbled here and there for the supporters to keep them in line. Sometimes all it takes is to offer a position or some kind of an award.
As far as Hales, he is part of this and for density smart growth, why do you think he was given a pass and was waltzed in? Do you think this planning outfit has gone too far even for his vision?

There's nothing ghetto about Aaron Brown -- he's a graduate of Macalester College! His "poor" schtick is just that - schtick. And the policies he advocates are "schticking" it to the rest of us.

(Groan.)

Pompous Aaron is both a soccer boy and a bike boy. Probably with a trust fund. It's all here:

http://aaronmichaelbrown.blogspot.com/

the "poor twenty-something who doesn't own a car and probably never will, let alone a house."

Maybe part of the reason theae are poo 20-somethings has to do with paying $2000-#2500 per month to rent a 2-bed in a hip neighborhood?

Be aware at 4% over 30 years, $2500/month = $525K loan and $2000/month = $415K loan.

Developers aren't building cheap apts. Of course, when BDS is chargin close to $20K/apt in SDCs and fees, it forces your hand on pricing.

Don't be so hard on Aaron - he is just paying his dues, so he can eventually snap up one of those sweet, sweet jobs at Metro or the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, which I'm sure is his long-term career plan.

"Maybe part of the reason there are poor 20-somethings has to do with paying $2000-#2500 per month to rent a 2-bed in a hip neighborhood?"

You don't expect members of the Creative Class to live with the peasantry, do you? Portland just isn't doing enough for graduates of expensive liberal arts colleges - it's a matter of "equity awareness"!

the "poor twenty-something who doesn't own a car and probably never will, let alone a house."

Don't tell that to folks in Utah. I know many, many young people (i.e. younger than 25) that purchase homes.

How do I know? They call me when they want the lights turned on at their new home. I have to ask if they rent or own (it doesn't make a difference in that state). And it's pretty obvious when the former signer was a contractor/home builder.

Only in Oregon is it such a problem. In California, at least there are jobs for the 20-somethings that allow them to afford the even more expensive homes. Same with Washington. In Oregon, the prices are high AND there are no jobs.

One of Mr. Brown's problems is that he is one of most pompous, bad writers I've ever seen. Long live run-on sentences! A sample from the Portland Afoot Facebook page:

Aaron Brown I think it's fantastic that we have adjusted many of our codes to allow for property developers to build projects for dense, livable communities that provide options for those who choose to live without an automobile, but I think many low-car advocates (including myself) ignore the fact that many longtime home owners feel as though the city is "rewriting the codes" to allow politically-connected, well-off developers to alter the form and fabric of their neighborhood at their (personal and potentially financial) expense. Sure, NIMBY-teasing is admittedly a guilty-pleasure of mine, but I do think that smart-growth and low-car advocates ignore homeowner concerns to have some control over the feel and shape of their neighborhood at their peril. I'm particularly concerned with the way our current tax code does not, in practice, favor construction on empty lots on major corridors over the destruction of older, preexisting buildings; I'm concerned that not enough of the savings that developers keep by not building parking aren't put into some sort of community fund for things that help mitigate their impact, and I'm concerned that livable streets advocates are so eager to suddenly support large developers in their mission to make a buck they've suddenly stopped siding with a populist, "whos-doing-what-to-my-community" sentiment. There are a plethora of economic justice and anti-displacement reasons to supporting large-scale, cost-efficient housing projects, and I endorse them fully, but allowing developers to write off spending money on parking facilities without also encouraging them to build units that can be adapted for larger families, without explicitly encouraging the maintenance of high capacity transit and top-notch bike/ped routes, and without forcing developers to directly engage with the needs of the local community (especially in places like north/northeast portland where government agencies like PDC have been historically deaf to local needs) strikes me as ignorant of the larger issues, beyond parking concerns, that are very relevant to this latest dense-development crisis.

tl;dr version: low-car advocates who want to see fewer parking garages shouldn't jump into the conversation shouting about parking garages but instead use their concern as an entry point into a broader conversation of current and future housing/neighborhood needs in Portland.

I have always been into Low Car living. I only own 1 car now. 1 is a pretty low number. Back in high school my CRX was dropped to the ground. It was by far the lowest car around.

"No Car" would be more descriptive of their real goals. It also wouldn't sound as stupid as "Low Car"

Aaron needs to rediscover his roots, back in MN!
Go back where you came from, kid. You can leach off your home state's welfare system there! I am tired of paying for you with my tax dollars!

"Only in Oregon is it such a problem. In California, at least there are jobs for the 20-somethings that allow them to afford the even more expensive homes. Same with Washington. In Oregon, the prices are high AND there are no jobs."

It's The Curse of Portland. If you are a computer science or engineering major, you move to the Bay Area or Seattle, where you can get a decent job at a tech firm.

If you are a "government" major, and your dream is to be a "planner" with a sinecure in some comfortable government bureaucracy, you move to Portland.

But while you are waiting for that government sinecure, you can still spend your time "epater les bourgeois", and mocking people who have lived in Portland longer than a year.

The Portland planning and development industry is indeed a gravy train, and the best way to keep a gravy train rolling is to get as many of the people on board as possible so they'll never want it to stop.

The business philosophy really isn't much different from that of a heroin dealer.

BTW, reading the twitter feed of the pro-bunker people regarding the parking meeting, you will learn that almost everyone testifying at the meeting was white and old, whose opinions are therefore irrelevant. (The meeting was referred to as #densitybacklash.)

Examples:

Portland Cityscape ‏@PDXCityscape
@PortlandAfoot Agree, #densitybacklash had the demographics of GOP rally: 95% angry old white people, maybe they thought it was #Agenda21 ?

Michael Andersen ‏@PortlandAfoot
3 hours of testimony about rental construction policy: very few young folks, almost nobody of color. #DensityBacklash #BrokenPublicProcess

Michael Andersen ‏@PortlandAfoot
Most respondents to community survey being discussed were homeowners who make more than $50k. Shocker! #DensityBacklash

Aaron Brown ‏@ambrown
#DensityBacklash @stephenjudkins notes the age disparity between pro- and anti- parking testimony.

---
...and here's an example of a couple who have no place in the New Portland:

Michael Andersen ‏@PortlandAfoot
Once/mo., senior couple drives to Costco. Increased # of cars on street means that couple have trouble unloading, she says. #densitybacklash

The reason the young lead us faithfully into war is they are dumb, easily fooled by propaganda and has a sense of entitlement.

As you age, you realize the fix has always been in and get real tired of being suckered.

The ultra rich are pushing this agenda and the young pseudo intellectuals are their marks - pushing us into bunkers while they enjoy the spacious expanses of our beautiful planet.

My family moved to Oregon in 1958. Portland was a great little city, but since we lived in LO it was great that our city fathers had the foresight to keep Dunthorpe as a buffer between us.

I remember coming back from a tradeshow in NYC in the early 80's and having to, oh my god, drive downtown and park on the street. How wonderful it was to stand downtown with no smells, look at the bluest of skies, and park on the street close to where I had business. This was mid-afternoon. Then came Vera.

I still live in LO and this article describes exactly what we call Portland creep. While the term seems new, we understood it in 2010 and began the change of city council to fight for LO's primacy. The belief in individual freedom not collective victims holds strong here.

As part of my freedom I choose to only eat occassionally in Portland or MC, shop in Washington or Clackamas County and when I'm on 205 or I5 needing gas I make sure I leave Multnomah County before stopping.

Keep Portland weird .... that makes me sad, but go for it as long as you pay for it not me. I'll live where I'm protected by the Constitution not a Portland planner.

Then came Vera.

Along with Sam and Charlie! Quite the trio, we can't seem to undo the agenda, why or why would we have voted for Sam when we knew he came out of Vera's agenda?
Why were we led into apparently so many "having" to vote for Charlie now?
We are in for it! Some tried to stop this with a write-in, nearly 20,000 have had it and that is quite a number, if only the media had featured a write-in, but of course they wouldn't.

I understand that apartments without on-site parking might make street parking more scarce. But I don't understand why people think they have a right to park in front of their house on a public street. If you want to own a car, and you want a place to park it, buy a place to park it! Otherwise, accept the risk that you may have to park a mile or more away from your destination.

Leave us out of this, please. We have our own problems.

To the young Portland Afoot boys, I say....you too will be old, and sooner than you could possibly imagine.
I wish and hope that you will be infirm, in pain and poor; with no transportation whatsoever.
Good Luck! You punks are going to need it.

So Aaron Brown is a total phony. I see a bright and shining future ahead of him. I left Portland seven years ago and last was there for a few days six months ago. There were tons more "20-somethings" (more or less) everywhere in the downtown district, all hours. It seemed like an increase of 500%.

As for the cockroaches Gayle Harris mentions in Brooklyn, I moved from the corner of West Burnside and King over to the Lloyd District precisely because the former had become overrun with cockroaches. I had lived there some years before and it was wonderful. But if you think kids are bad, when cockroaches move in they really do take over and they really don't move out. I had thought it was just the building I was renting in, but the manager of the local 7-11 told me it was all of them. He said he knew that from the plastic bottles people would bring in for recycling. He said they were all full of cockroaches.

You often don't see them unless you get up in the middle of the night and switch on the light.

To Portland Native, who said, "you too will be old, and sooner than you could possibly imagine," are truer words ever spoken? I look at the truly old and wonder if they just don't bother telling anyone. It will tell itself.