#44 goes right by, #4 is a block away. But growing transport of choice for this area is bikes. What about a bike-friendly apartment? What would that entail?
I don't think so. There's a steady stream of bikes flowing with rush hour traffic down Vancouver and up Williams year-round now. Probably at least 2 or 3 a minute between 4 PM and dusk right now. Obviously the weather has a factor, but we're talking affiliation and not actual practice.
This is the Portland generic business plan - showcase hipsters but target young parents + tourists, Voo Doo, Powells, Mercury, Adidas, W+K, Stumptown, etc.
"This is the Portland generic business plan - showcase hipsters but target young parents + tourists"
If the people actually coming are young parents, then why would a businessman build apartments for the "showcase hipsters".
In answer to your original point, they are building units around town with no parking to supposedly appeal to bicyclists and walkers, but I don't believe it for a second. There is no studies or hard numbers whatsoever to support the conclusion that these people don't own cars that just crowd up the surrounding blocks.
Couple of thoughts. As a resident of the neighborhood I have no opinion at this point about this development as I have not studied it carefully but for Amanda to suggest it is an "unwanted impact" without asking anyone beyond a few NIMBY's who showed up to testify is pretty rich.
Also Williams is a bike highway. The 4 and 44 run up (4 turns at Freemont). I think there is plenty of transit around it and I consider bikes alternative transit.
Thirdly, it's pretty ironic that these same guidelines were used for dozens of buildings in the ultra rich Pearl and other core downtown buildings but suddenly when there is a development in North Portland utilizing the tax breaks it becomes a "controversy".
I'm no planner but it seems rather unfair to ask a developer to submit to a set of guidelines drawn up by the City and then suddenly come down on the developer for following the guidelines you wrote!
It's not the developer's fault that the city wrote up some weak-ass tax laws.
@pdx97217
An act of god.
Developers aren't stupid. Rain 8 months a year=a lot of fair weather bikers.
This is the Portland generic business plan - showcase hipsters but target young parents + tourists, Voo Doo, Powells, Mercury, Adidas, W+K, Stumptown, etc.
It's a niche. Get in it.
If the people actually coming are young parents, then why would a businessman build apartments for the "showcase hipsters".
In answer to your original point, they are building units around town with no parking to supposedly appeal to bicyclists and walkers, but I don't believe it for a second. There is no studies or hard numbers whatsoever to support the conclusion that these people don't own cars that just crowd up the surrounding blocks.
Also Williams is a bike highway. The 4 and 44 run up (4 turns at Freemont). I think there is plenty of transit around it and I consider bikes alternative transit.
Thirdly, it's pretty ironic that these same guidelines were used for dozens of buildings in the ultra rich Pearl and other core downtown buildings but suddenly when there is a development in North Portland utilizing the tax breaks it becomes a "controversy".
I'm no planner but it seems rather unfair to ask a developer to submit to a set of guidelines drawn up by the City and then suddenly come down on the developer for following the guidelines you wrote!
but the developers only hire a "choice" few
hence the continuity of all the designs