The Antiplanner’s former hometown of Portland, Oregon, is proposing to create a new urban renewal district that is so gerrymandered that blogger Jack Bogdanski suspects it must cover at least 50 scams.
Most of Portland’s previous urban renewal districts are pretty regular, following roughly rectangular boundaries. The proposed new district has fingers going in all directions, often connected to other parts of the district by an area no wider than a street. Some of the fingers overlap existing or lapsed districts.
This is not to say that impotence treating pill will not lead to penile erection wholesale cialis price on time so that you can enjoy the sexual activity without interruption. The order cialis midwayfire.com skilled paramedical staff that knows how to please you. It in turn stabilizes mood and helps to get rid of premature ejaculation naturally. cheap viagra canada The little blue pills assist the men for their penis erection at the viagra on line prescription time of their sexual organs is widely talked about and mocked at.
Take my word for it, nothing in this district is blighted or needs public funds for renewal. Most of it is heralded as a part of Portland’s successful planning in the past. In particular, the parts that overlap existing or previous district should already have been renewed; why do they need to be renewed again?
Instead, this is simply a scam to grab tax dollars that would otherwise be “wasted” by going to school districts, libraries, fire, and other services. Planners estimate they will be able to milk the properties in this district for enough annual revenue to make payments on $345 million worth of bonds. They can then use those hundreds of millions of dollars to subsidize all sorts of projects.
Urban renewal was created to help cities kick-start redevelopment of slums, abandoned industrial areas, and other blighted areas. Now it is used primarily for crony capitalism, social engineering, and to allow cities to pad their budgets by stealing funds from other taxing districts. Only time will tell which of these three uses is the primary goal of this new district.
Randal, you and others have written about the desire of Portland planners to emulate “investment patterns” found in metropolitan Los Angeles, Calif.
And the map above reminds me of Los Angeles in another way – the narrow strips connecting that parcel of land on the Willamette River to the rest of the district looks suspiciously like the Harbor Gateway area of the City of Los Angeles, which allows the Port of L.A. and nearby neighborhoods (San Pedro and Wilmington) to be connected to the main body of the city to the north.
It looks to me like someone wants that riverfront parcel (Google Maps says it’s “Waterfront Park”) connected to the renewal district.
I know the Oregon legislature has spelled out the legal definition of “blighted” in some ORS, but is there anything else that could make this kind of blatant scamming via “urban renewal” illegal? It seems like the PDC has significant leeway with what they can deem “blighted” and not send any of their committee members to jail.
I’m very familiar with all the areas within this proposed URA and fully agree that nothing there is blighted, certainly not when many outer NE, SE and even some inner SW Portland neighborhoods still don’t have paved streets.
Where is Dan (and Highwayman) with some snarky comment or other defense for this bogus scam? If Dan is feeling real superior, he’ll use some sophisticated planning language and wax poetic about all those bs studies they love doing.
Most of the Airport Way urban renewal area around the Portland Airport Max line was Farm land and it is all in the Airport Way urban renewal area.
We assumed it must have been urban blighted green space.
blighted: the state or result of being blighted or deteriorated; dilapidation; decay: urban blight.
While I don’t support urban renewal at the expense of taxpayers, having lived downtown Portland, I am intimately familiar with its nooks and crannies and know of some really dilapidated places on this map.
One really hideous building on 3rd and Oak was torn down with the intent of building a Vancouver, BC-style skinny apartment building. Now it’s a gaping hole collecting trash from winos and gutter punks. Ironically, it seems to be in a finger that’s not in the zone.
Right next to the hole, along 3rd between Oak and Stark is a very dilapidated block; Portland Outdoor Store, an old icon, is in serious need of repairs, and the porn store/sex shop is an eyesore.
Interesting that the area around the Oak Street MAX Station is in the boundary. Guess McCormick and Schmick need some renewal. (And the Federal Building next door is exempt.) During the last several years, businesses abandoned this area. Guess the area needs renewed to attract more businesses.
While there are a few blighted blocks downtown, I agree that overall, the area is not in need of significant urban renewal. Any renewal should be privately done and not with taxpayer money.
Frank: I believe McCormick and Schmick’s on Oak and 1st is not open anymore.
Old Town needs better historic preservation and upkeep, and I support urban renewal in this area especially for its historic contribution. Unfortunately it is being torn apart by homeless people and party-goers. Just my opinion of course 🙂
http://photos.oregonlive.com/oregonian/2010/02/quietly_the_past_6.html?fromentry=4210983&fromblog=4715
People take for granted the collection of beautiful historic buildings in Portland — forgetting that San Francisco and Seattle both lost a good portion of their historic buildings to large fires. San Francisco loosing a good quantity of its buildings in the 1906 earthquake.
Old Town might be one of the greatest places to see historic cast iron buildings. I fully support prudent use of urban renewal dollars for many historic areas of Portland.