This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on March 21, 2013 10:47 AM. The previous post in this blog was The unmistakable aroma. The next post in this blog is Tri-Met's agenda -- mostly about more rail to nowhere. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Portland "planners" push fake population growth numbers again

The Portland "planning" acolytes can't seem to stop themselves from lying about how many people are going to be flocking to the city in the years ahead:

According to materials distributed at the presentation, more than 584,000 people live in Portland. That number is expected to increase by more than 280,000 people by 2035, when nearly 150,000 additional jobs also are projected.

During the presentation, [city planning chief Joseph] Zehnder said state land-use planning laws require Portland to prove it can accommodate the new housing and jobs during the next 25 years. Zehnder says planners have not yet identified enough acreage for all the industrial and institutional jobs that are expected to be created.

Over the 23-year period between now and 2035, the "planning" children are projecting a compound annual population growth rate for Portland of 1.8%. Even if they mean a 25-year period, the rate is 1.58%. That's total crap, and they know it. Over the decade 2000 to 2010, the population grew at a compound rate of 0.99% per year. Any "plan" that's based on 1.5% growth or more is bogus on its face. It's high time that residents start calling out the Joe Zehnder types for their out-and-out lies.

Comments (21)

More dis-information in denial of the truth.

Washington County is growing waaaaaaaaaaaaay faster than Mult county and will pass it in population in about 15 years. You can see it since they are growing Earl's turf into Washington county.

We call these reports the result of "confirmation bias".

"The second thing should be, we’re going to do everything we can to create businesses,” said Zeulner"

I was going to say this is a lie, then I had to stop and consider all the planning jobs the city has created, the bike delivery jobs that wouldn't be there without the city's help, and a few more streetcar conductors to drive around money-losing trains. Jobs, yes. But profitable jobs in large numbers, no way. City beaurocrats know nothing about profit and loss, only about tax and spend. Planners should have 3 qualifications before they are hired by any city. They should:

1) have had a job for at least 3 years where they were responsible for the finances of a for-profit company that showed a market-comparable profit during that time.
2) have to be at least 35 years old before they start their first planning job
3) have to live in the jurisdiction where they get a job

If this makes the profession more difficult to get into, GREAT! I'd even move the age up to 40+, but it is illegal to specify age. Just make sure their life experience gives them the wisdom to know they don't know everything and they respect and can work with all kinds of people.

When were these state land use laws put in place? Yes start throwing rocks at me, 1000 Friends of Oregon, but should there not be a new discussion? This does not necessarily mean elimination but certainly is due for evaluation. What have the results thus far been and how far should this go making the very central places where people live becoming a sacrifice zone?
If the day comes that leaving the "extreme" density is more difficult, we will regret having destroyed the very nature within our cities for the plan.
This doesn't have to mean sprawl as the boogeyman for us to accept the continuation of degraded livability. Look to the BC plan I have written about before and in fact they have saved more farmland than we have. So there are other options. Just maybe not quite so lucrative for some.
Furthermore, the numbers of people coming idea must be challenged.

Do THESE "job" projection figures include the ten thousand medical research jobs that will fill the South Waterfront?

Oh... these figures are from the SAME "planners"?

Replacing delivery trucks and semis with bicycle powered delivery vehicles will vastly increase the number of required deliveries. On the plus side, this will lead to an increase in the number of needed delivery pedalers, thus creating crappy jobs for people. On the downside, some businesses will be driving either out of town or into bankruptcy, destroying jobs.

Way to go, Portland!

These numbers are easy to achieve--just annex Beaverton and Hillsboro.

I wish they'd focus on the jobs growth first, rather than the housing growth, but we know they won't.

You are forgetting the millions of climate refugees who will be arriving soon.

Furthermore, their plan has backfired when it comes to jobs. Filling up the land with more housing has been the wrong plan.

The UGB has created a scarcity of enough open parcels of land left for businesses.
Report cites Portland industrial land supply woes

Let's be nice and say that they got these numbers from a known source. I just hope they're careful when they get the next set: if they reach that far up Sam Adams's butt, they're likely to snag their fingers on his back teeth.

Birth rates have gone splat.  One and one-half to two percent growth rates?  Good luck with that.

Even if they fess up later that their numbers were phoney, people always believe the first lie and that is all that counts.

Linking up with the Richard Florida post - they are probably assuming that Portland will grow considerably faster than the metro as a whole, since that is what people like Florida have been claiming is going to happen.

All the cool people want to live in cities, haven't you heard? People are going to be moving in droves from the suburbs to live in the apartment bunkers.

For years we were told that the population boom in Portland in the 90's was unsustainable. During that time they ushered in new powers for Metro when the voters, voted to limit Metro's powers. Unfortunately by voting for the limit, the voter gave Metro more power. It was called a limit despite the fact it gave Metro more power to mandate, their mandates. Before they could just suggest you do something, they wanted.

Most of the population growth in Portland in the 80's and 90's were from the annexations of east county and other areas. They were not new residents to the area, but residents that use to live out side the Portland city limits and now counted as new residents of Portland.

The same people, living in new boundaries

I suspect those same people if given another chance would have done everything they could to have stayed out of those Portland city limits.

It was hard to stay out of Portland, they were using the triple majority method. After most of east county had been annexed, was deemed unconstitutional by the court but it was too late by then.

The triple majority allowed them to keep changing the boundaries until they got a majority to vote to go in the city. So They got them one piece at a time.

Looks like the method one at a time to wrangle/wreck areas under their plans is working too!

Lake Oswego has some industrial land in Foothills that is not being turned into condos. We could sure use some nice bread smells here! Franz, C'mon down!

"Lake Oswego has some industrial land in Foothills that is not being turned into condos. We could sure use some nice bread smells here! Franz, C'mon down!"

No Nolo, Stafford, instead of composting.

people are going to be flocking to the city in the years ahead

We're flocked.

Clinamen wrote: "Furthermore, the numbers of people coming idea must be challenged."

It's ironic that, on the day after what would have been Tom McCall's 100th birthday, where everyone seems to be jumping in and praising his work and ethos, they apparently do not embrace his position that growth for the sake of growth is the mantra of a cancer and is unsustainable for its own sake.

Other recent news items have countered the claims of "job growth" by pointing out that a majority of these jobs are minimum wage with no chance of advancement and - some - without adequate benefits and health care. These "employed" cannot hope to afford the "market rate" biscuit box apartments springing up all over town.

Then again, they aren't the coveted creative class. And a favored few are getting rich off the back of these people and that's apparently what counts.

Clicky Web Analytics