Skip to comments.Portlanders balk at 'no parking' apartments
Posted on 09/15/2012 7:43:25 AM PDT by Twotone
PORTLAND -- Residents of some Portland neighborhoods are asking, Wheres the parking? when it comes to new high density apartment buildings.
There are nearly 20 apartment buildings planned, being built, or already constructed in the past 18 months that do not include parking for tenants. The developments are on the citys north and east sides.
Some neighborhood groups are balking at the buildings, saying parking is already at a premium.
(Excerpt) Read more at kgw.com ...
As long as Obama still allows us freedom of movement, these no parking apts should wither on the free market vine and be a big failure.
No cars, no smoking, no meat available for purchase anywhere within walking distance.
The urban planners will have the poor chickens right where they want ‘em, in high-rise coops where they’re easily controlled and their eggs — oops, I mean “taxes” — are easily collected.
However, there WILL be a soma store on every corner!
Oops! Did I say “soma”? Sorry, I meant “Starbucks”.
So people have a right to CHOOSE NOT TO LIVE THERE
Soon they will be turned into section 8 housing
Agenda 21 “Sustainable communities’ - IOW, pretty ghettos, keep the serfs contained/movement limited.
The usual designation for buildings like that is “dormitory”, because the people that live in them are usually of the age and finances that they don’t have a car.
It’s not required that you live there.
In reality parking adds huge expenses to the cost of construction and to the rent of each apartment. And those lots or ramps must be maintained and repaired (more costs to be passed on to tenants).
If you dont own a car then it will be the perfect place for you.
If you have one, be prepared for some long walks from your spot.
Is this a government planned project?
Portland is known as a liberal mecca, with strong controls on development, zoning, urban planning, etc. So you reap what you sow.
No parking? And prospective tenants “balk”?
Why would this be a surprise to ANYONE?
The article references city planners, but I think these are private developments. There was an article a couple of years ago about planning for homes where there would only be parking for ONE vehicle & everyone was expected to use the light rail which would be there ‘evenutally’. I don’t think the rail ever got put in. Not the best planning...
And that was some bad editing right there, I’ll tell you what.
“there WILL be a soma store on every corner!”
A Bhang store would be more likely!
I doubt it. “ICC A117.1-2009 Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities” requires accessible parking. The IBC 20xx refers to ICC A117.1 unless federal money is involved then its “Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS)” Both use the ADAG guidlines. I don’t think local ruling jurisdictions can override unless their code is more stringent .
I think the complaint is from the standpoint of people who live in the neighborhood and anticipate cars of the new tenants being parked more or less permanently on the streets in front of businesses and so forth, making it problematic to even do business there. A similar thing happens when developers swarm into an area and build thousands of developments without coordinating with existing services. The result is children having classrooms in trailers pulled onto school grounds and 50 students per classroom, etc.
“Weve embraced compact development, weve embraced bicycling and car free living. Its not at the exclusion of everything else but its an option we want to offer for the future, said Joe Zehnder, Chief Planner for the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability.
I think Mr. Zehnder’s title says it all. Portland IS the Brave New World.
Portland is a craphole. It’s one big retirement community for twenty-somethings. I wonder what portion of the local economy is supported directly from parents sending rent and food money to no-good adolescent 30 year old perma-students.