Comments

1
This is possibly the best thing the Mercury has ever published! Please do more disaster-readiness mixed with public property records reporting. It's like Giles looked into my brain and wrote my dreams.
2
It would be horrible if every building had to be rebuilt to meet every new building code. Jesus - do you own a home? Would you like to get a letter saying that you had to enlarge all your windows this year, at your own expense? Or increase the size of your foundation timbers? I'm sure something changes in the codes every year - nobody could afford that. There wouldn't be a single homeowner in the city.
3
@Reymont: So you're saying that property owners shouldn't have to make necessary improvements if they weren't required at the time the property was built?
4
Retrofitting an average Portland home costs a lot less. This is one of Commissioner Novick's priorities... http://www.portlandoregon.gov/novick/artic…
5
@Graham - Sure, with the standard caveats that the article mentioned - changes in ownership, or in use. I can't buy a barn built in 1919 and turn it into a daycare without rather significant changes. But if I've owned and used it that long, I shouldn't have to remodel it every year to reflect the newest barn building code changes.
6
@Paul - $3,400 to comply with this year's seismic regulations. What about all the other building codes? Paint? Materials? Foundation? Windows? What about next year's seismic regulations? There'd be a neverending series of changes.

Hell, one of my buildings is flush against the sidewalk, because it was there before the city required setbacks. I think that's no longer the case, so Graham and Nathan seem to be suggesting that I need to pay to have it torn down or moved back 10 feet, because they've changed the codes since it was built.
7
@reymont: I'm glad I don't lease any property from you. You're essentially a slumlord if you don't believe you need to make neccesary safety improvements because of legal loopholes.
8
@Graham - You're totally right, I should definitely tear down that building to comply with the new offset laws.
9
I think this story is more about fixing up the buildings that route 911 calls and the internet. And why that's extremely urgent. And not anyone's apartment buildings. That's your ass. Not mine. Telecom is everybody's asses. Mine and yours.
10
I mean, Graham, I just don't think you understand the scope of the changes they're talking about. Remember when they used lead paint? Okay, so that changes and you want every owner to scrape EVERYTHING down to bare wood and repaint. Then, they make the process a bit harder - nowadays, you have to get pass a "lead free" chemical analysis test. So when they implemented that test, you'd have to scrape EVERYTHING back down and repaint again. And then AGAIN when they switched to the low-VOC paint.

Now interior walls can't have more than 18" between joists? Tear down every interior wall and rebuild the house. The law changes again a few years later to 16"? Do it again. Otherwise Graham will call you a slumlord.

Wood foundation posts smaller than 8"x8" aren't allowed to touch bare dirt anymore, so tear out the foundation and start over. Then nothing smaller than 6"x6". Tear it all out again. Then no wood foundation posts at all - tear everything down to the foundation again and rebuilt again. No one can live in the house while any of this is being done, by the way...

Exit windows in bedrooms have to be over a certain size - kick everyone out of that bedroom, tear open the wall, and put in a bigger one. Then, when they increase the size a few years later, do it again. And then again, when they say they have to be within 20" of the floor. And then again when they make it 16".

Change the amount of overhang required by the roof? Fine, everyone has to move out of every house in town while all the roofs are raised.

No more blown-in insulation allowed in the attic? Get a dustbuster and a pair of tweezers, and get up there and spend about 3 months collecting it all before putting in the newest "approved" insulation.

It's just a ridiculous concept - you'd never "finish" any house long enough to move into it. It'd just be constant rebuilding. No one could afford to keep up with it all.
11
Think of all the times you would have had to completely replace the wiring in your house, and the plumbing, too! We went from knob-and-tube to coax to modern cable, with multiple steps between. And the same advances in plumbing. That's a dozen times moving out and tearing open every wall, for weeks at a time. Ridiculous! But otherwise Graham would call you a slumlord!
12
@Reymont: You're the one obsessed with offset laws. EVERYONE ELSE IS TALKING ABOUT SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. When there's an earthquake and one of your properties collapses and kills everyone, what's your response to their family and loved ones going to be? "I'm sorry I didn't make seismic upgrades to that home, I was too cheap to care about the well being of your family."
13
@Graham - Every building code, offset laws included, ultimately are for safety. Every single one.
14
@Reymont: So you shouldn't be required to keep the properties you own in a safe condition because? Because why? It's too onerous for you to comply with the law?

EXPLAIN TO ME IN SMALL WORDS WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH SAFETY LAWS. THEN EXPLAIN TO US WHY THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR ROUTING SAFETY AND EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS SHOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW.

Do you provide your tenants with fire extinguishers and smoke detectors? Or do you think the laws requiring those are too difficult to comply with? Where is the "Magic Reymont Line of Too Tough to Comply"? Why are you so antithetical to the whole idea of a social safety net that keeps us all safe?
15
I haven't seen Reymont this riled up since Randy Leonard left office.
16
It's telling - at least to me - that city hall got gutted and totally redone with seismic improvements, then the federal building got totally rebuilt. The one they tore down wasn't really that old...

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.