Land grab writ large

The developers did not get what they wanted—or at least not fast enough—with the becoming-infamous Residential Infill Project, so they took their issues to Salem.

While neighbors were testifying at the Capitol in support of controlling hazmat during demolitions (see next post), members of the Home Builders Association were bamboozling leaders on the House side to bring on HB2007. (To be fair, a rep of the HBA did show at the hearing for the hazmat-control bill, where he doubted the connection between lead dust and its health impacts; fortunately a bevy of health officials were there to share the science and reports that prove it.)

The preamble to HB2007 sounds alluring, and we'd love if it were true: all about affordable housing, and the need to fast-track it. But listen to some of the devilish details. Who better to explain them than the leader of the drafters themselves, the Oregon HBA's CEO, Jon Chandler, as he recently did in a post on the group's Facebook page. Some of his excerpted goals of HB2007:

"Limiting the ability of cities and counties to reduce density below the zoned density" 

"Prohibiting the use of historic district designations from being used to reduce density or prevent infill and redevelopment"

"Accessory Dwelling Units and duplexes as outright uses in every single-family zone"

This aggressive site-procurement plan entails a sweeping unzoning that does away with decades of careful land-use planning and local determination. While business interests play an increasing role at the national level, this particular business group—known to manipulate the system at the local level with "engineered" testimony (full doc here) and for buying 1000 "Friends" of Oregon influence (poor Tom McCall!)—wants carte blanche to place their products anywhere, even if, and especially if, that land happens to be in an already established neighborhood full of well-sited, unique, and viable affordable housing. 

Thanks to activists (Architectural Heritage Center, Laurelhurst neighborhood, McCulloch Foundation, Portland Together, and Restore Oregon) for their analysis of HB2007 and info on how to respond. If you're ready to write right now, go here.

A $2 million duplex rises in Northeast Portland. House Bill 2007
would usher in more of the same, everywhere.

For an example of the current generous allowances for new development, here's a duplex under way in Northeast Portland (above), where each unit will cost a mil. 

Affordable housing takes serious local investment and subsidy; let's do that instead of increasing the teardown blitz. 

If in Portland we had only vastly reduced demolitions when they began in earnest, we would have available thousands more units of affordable housing than we do now—real affordable housing, made of old-growth durable materials and tested by time. We also would not have dusted their sites and thousands of neighbors and other properties with lead and asbestos. 

What we need are "healthy neighborhoods," where people of all income levels can continue to live in solid well-built housing, avoiding the economic redlining that comes from too many of the projects pictured above. In these sanctuary neighborhoods, too, the air would be safer to breathe, vegetables and berries could be eaten out of the yards, and kids could freely dig in the dirt.

A local post office makes strides with hazmat; so can the rest of us.

Check the latest demolition list from the Portland Chronicle. If you find one within 400 feet of you (the distance the toxic dust travels), get in touch (submit info at top right, or find a UNR member) for fliers with measures to try and protect yourselves and your families. 

Commissioner Eudaly's chief of staff, Marshall Runkel, recently talked about the need for "responsible demolition." Although sort of an oxymoron, it shows leaders are listening and the issue is becoming too big to ignore (see that hyperlinked list). Taking heart from a proclamation recently posted on the wall of a post office off Northeast Broadway (above), it feels good to be a hazmat hero.

It's not all roses in Rose City Park

Meanwhile, Mayor Ted Wheeler enjoyed standing-room-only reception at last week's meeting of the Rose City Park Neighborhood Association at the German American Society, Northeast 57th and Sandy. 

Mayor Ted Wheeler talks about the next generations
 in Rose City Park on April 25.

Before he really touched the hot-button issue of parking, he talked about how expensive it is to build. For sure. But when not provided by developers, that "expense" falls to someone else, and impacts the public street system. 

Mayor Wheeler did not seem to consider the fairness of offloading a landlord's responsibility for satisfying tenants' needs (such as storing their belongings, including cars) onto the street, a public amenity that serves businesses and in particular many residents who rely on delivered services, such as seniors and the disabled. Until we garnish rent checks to build the tenants parking garages, the irresponsibility of no-parking apartments will rub everyone the wrong way, except those fattening their bottom line by not building it.

Also on the subject of development, Mayor Wheeler explained how the younger generation likes to live in smaller units with shared amenities and spaces. Which makes sense, for starting out in one's life and career, and being able to save money by eschewing the many expensive apartments that have opened all around town. 

But what happens when they might later want to gain a toehold in the market as an equity holder, put down roots as a household? 

We're going to wish we still had those thousands of (mostly) modest size starter homes just dumped in the landfill. The "greenest" and more affordable house is the one allowed to remain standing, never the one taking its place.

This could be good news

At a recent meeting of the Central Northeast Neighbors land use committee, Bureau of Planning staffer Nan Stark talked about a plan to focus on ADUs for Cully, a neighborhood known for large lots and low infrastructure. 

Maybe city leaders heard from the farmers of Cully (there are many), who didn't want to lose crops and health protections to the uncontrolled hazardous materials from demolitions. In any case, there are less destructive ways to grow, and creative people can lead the way.