33rd and Broadway apartment bunker resurrected
The property in question is an awful eyesore, and almost anything would be an improvement. But the traffic impacts of this proposal are downright scary.
| Posted at 10:42 AM | Permalink |
|
About
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 12, 2012 10:42 AM.
The previous post in this blog was How to get more tourists to Portland: tax them harder.
The next post in this blog is Strapped Tri-Met to borrow a cool $111 million.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff
« How to get more tourists to Portland: tax them harder |
Main
| Strapped Tri-Met to borrow a cool $111 million »
Comments (9)
But traffic won't be a problem when there are no drivers in Portland anymore!
Posted by Mr. Grumpy | June 12, 2012 11:03 AM
I like how a couple people have commented saying that they want a MAX stop added at 33rd to help with traffic. And that it would be so convenient for Fred Meyer.
What they might not like is what happens after the MAX stop is put in. (Anyone remember what happened to the last Fred Meyer that was really close to a MAX stop? It was turned into an empty lot full of concrete rubble just like sits on this proposed site right now.)
Posted by Michael | June 12, 2012 11:17 AM
These complexes are allowed and then where are the accommodating needs? More pressures on the schools, more public safety needs, more parks and open space needs? Instead it appears if close to light rail, another tax abated complex?
Posted by clinamen | June 12, 2012 11:38 AM
It's not anywhere near a MAX stop. And bus service through there doesn't go downtown any more.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 12, 2012 11:49 AM
Remember Jack's post on the Commons by (I think) 60th ave? Just another TOD catastrophe waiting to happen:
http://cascadepolicy.org/pdf/env/P_1019.htm
All of this is eminently predictable by anyone not blinded to the developer/city of Portland culture of corruption and TOD mania.
Posted by metrosucks | June 12, 2012 1:32 PM
'It's a congested area, no doubt about that," Sackett said. "That's one of the reasons it's so attractive to people."
Simply amazing.
Posted by Max | June 12, 2012 5:43 PM
A tax abatement doesn't need light rail. It could likely be approved because of the bus service on Broadway. In other words if it happens, another developer raping the schools of cash.
Posted by TR | June 12, 2012 7:47 PM
A tax abatement doesn't need light rail...
Can't keep up with everything. Would be interesting to have a current list of what does allow tax abatements to be implemented.
Posted by clinamen | June 12, 2012 8:17 PM
What gets me is the fact that most of these huge places aren't condo bunkers at all but apartments. The large apartment complexes of 200, 300, 700 (Lloyd Center) and up to the proposed 900+ units in Foothills in LO (thanks Homer and Dike) are not neighborhoods. They are not part of existing neighborhoods. The residents are transient and not committed to the city or neighborhood they are located in. Without the roots of ownership, there is little to bind people to the place. The larger the complex, the less like tenants will become contributing members of the neighborhood. This is the promise of TODs. Large anonymous human warehouses that destroy the neighborhood feel. No matter how ratty or how nice, the residents are still just passing through. In this instance, condos would be marginally better than apartments.
Posted by Nolo | June 12, 2012 11:39 PM