old. fat. slow.
people on both sides of this issue need to get a fucking grip.
dispatch a car to Beaverton to see if Andy's head exploded.
Blabby - yes. still a significant number of units. question: have you ever worked to get a project developed with Portland's zoning code? plenty of rules there, bub. personally haven't heard of any "progressives" pining for their removal.
sgp - maybe. but isn't there two sides to every story? I know it's "just" a blog, but can we at least pretend to provide something approaching balanced?
25% is probably a little high. even 20% represents a significant cross-section of the housing market, though. and it will grow as the close-in parts of Portland continue to get denser.
could you be any more one-sided and myopic in your reporting on this issue? it's like you're Portland's version of Paul Constant, with a local flair.
I honestly think that some form of parking minimums MAY be the way to go on this issue, but the City will get their asses handed to them by the courts if they try to change the rules after they've granted a developer the go-ahead to start construction. Hale's lost a ton of credibility on this by getting all knee-jerky.
one other thought - if you are carless do you want to pay for some other asshole to have unfettered access to a parking spot? adding parking minimums to the code make it so everyone is subsidizing the parking at every development they live in. Blabby will say that they drive anyway, but he's wrong. there are lots of people in Portland that don't have cars but end up paying for automobile storage anyway. is that fair?
RickStevens = StJohnsRules???
could it be?
All Comments »
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
Contact Info |
Production Guidelines |