You know, the building doesn't bother me as much as the fact that it's just kind of happening around us..... This will blend better with it's immediate surroundings than the one over in Buckman, but it's funny how interchangeable the design is. Thanks for the traffic - I noticed my page views spiked, and immediately suspected you'd found this post.....

Having spent some time on a neighborhood asc in the early '90s I find them to be pretty useless. City Council basically uses them to toss a bone to the public.
Or just get rid of the present council and go to an election by districts.
But I waste my breath.
M.H.W.

I find them to be pretty useless. City Council basically uses them to toss a bone to the public.

Part of Mayor Potter's visioning process is looking at how citizens interact with government through the neighborhood association "system." Who's to say we couldn't have stronger NAs, and more decision-making authority, and real local control? Along with neighborhood business associations, our mostly natural allies, we could have a more forceful presence at the table.

And NA boards are elected.

I just came back from a meeting in Buckman where we're trying to develop a united, proactive response to all the condo projects hitting our SE neighborhoods. But, of course, this isn't just a SE issue either...so the NA system becomes a way for us to connect with each other, city-wide.

Any system of democratic governance is only going to be as good as the effort we put into making it work.

Frank Dufay I just came back from a meeting in Buckman where we're trying to develop a united, proactive response to all the condo projects hitting our SE neighborhoods. But, of course, this isn't just a SE issue either
JK: I assume all of you voted to remove Metro’s power to mandate density increases and roll back those mandates already in place 4 years ago? Instead of Metro’s trick measure which won. To refresh your memory on how Metro lied to us, I have reactivated the original web site:
http://www.StopMetro.com
Metro recommends a 23% increase in density in your neighborhood
And a 22% increase along main streets.
And a 29% increase along corridors.
Be glad you are not near toy train station - they recommended for a 1 mile dia circle of 300% density increase, approximating New York Central city density.

How many people want to take away Metro’s power to mandate increased density?

Thanks
JK

Damn, Jack. Just five words, and you made his traffic explode.

Suggestion: When you're linking content-free to another blog (especially a smaller one), consider turning off your comments. Push the conversation over there. Share the love.

Quite frankly I am looking forward to the day when I don't have to mow the lawn and my spouse and I can head off to do our volunteer work in South America or vacation without worrying about a roof leak, some other damage to our single family home while we are gone. We have talked and probably have one of these condos in our future, but with teenage kids and a big dog, there is a need for a backyard and basketball hoop. Honestly though, on our income we could not afford our house in the neighborhood if we bought it today and not 20 years ago. I would like to see this type of housing, as the old boomers like myself retire and want to go off exploring. But we also need to keep families in the neighborhoods. The condos are nice for old farts like us or young people starting out, but unless you have a place for kids to play, and I am talking one that is not covered in dog poop. One of the kids house hold chores is to do poop patrol, and our dog is trained to a particular corner of the yard. It would be nice to be able to buy in our neighborhood, but I worry about driving out the families. My spouse grew up in Multnomah in a modest home and went to elementary school at what is now the Arts Center so we have some nostalgic ties there. But it seems the high denisty is driving families to the suburbs. I am hoping to hang onto our house and sell it to one of the kids on the easy payment plan as it is the only way I can see them affording to raise the next generation in Portland.

JK: How many people want to take away Metro’s power to mandate increased density?

Matilda: Do you own land in Corbett, or Mulino, or near Hagg Lake, JK? Because no more density in Portland means homes would be built in those areas for all the new homeowners. And then we could build new freeways for a few billion dollars to let those new homeowners drive to their jobs. All we need for that is an increase in the gas tax, right? How many people want to increase the gas tax so that property owners in Corbett, Mulino, and Hagg Lake can rake in the bucks?

Or, JK, are you one of those "no-growther" "peak oil" "sustainability" types? Somehow, I doubt it. Those folks aren't interested in paving over countryside and destroying city neighborhoods for new freeways.

But they are obviously ok with "destroying city neighborhoods" with condo towers.

And all they need to get money for new freeways is to quit spending the existing money on choo-choos.

Matilda, why not let Corbett, Forest Grove and Mulino decide what gets built where? Who are you (or Metro for that matter) to tell them what they can or can't build?

Most people would agree with Jim that Metro has too much say over what communities can build.

it's time for the pendulum to swing back to the middle.