Neat. Davis's City Club presentation (as heard on OPB, anyway) was pretty interesting.

Carla, you are my density.

Also, while Portlanders may be increasingly embracing density, out here in Bend it's still the D-word to the establishment.

Our City Manager, who has generally seemed to be a reasonable guy, recently proclaimed (regarding Bend's ridiculous UGB expansion proposal) “I think the agency would like us to have more intense development so that we upzone existing neighborhoods, and we don’t think that is realistic here in Bend,” he said. “We would like to preserve our existing neighborhoods.”

Please. Bend has 4 residential units per acre on average which is well below pretty much any other city in Oregon. It has vast tracts of undeveloped or underutilized land WITHIN the urban core and pretty much everywhere else. We HAVE no existing neighborhoods through much of town, just vast tracts of partially developed large lot subdivisions with nothing to walk to but more of the same.

Out here, density is a bad, bad word. Why? Because all politics is growth politics and subdivision developers rule. The CIty manager's smart enough to know that if he says otherwise, he's out of a job. But you'd never hear that from him.

Here's some advice to anyone in Portland who cares about Oregon's land use laws: PAY ATTENTION to what's happening in Bend, because developers and politicians are going to attempt to use it to substantially loosen the ways that our land use laws encourage smart growth.

The three (non-partisan) candidates for Metro President will sit on a discussion panel at this month's Washington County Democrats Central Committee meeting (7PM Jan 27th) at a location to be announced in a few days. Readers can submit questions via webform at the Washco Dems website (also available in a day or two.) Or just show up before the meeting and fill out a form with your question for any or all candidates. Check back at the WCD website for updates and details, and join the Washco Dems with guests Rex Burkholder, Tom Hughes and Bob Stacey on the 27th.

Ahh yes, that hyped up word “density” flaunted by politicians that burn up fuel gallivanting around the country with their Al Gore type rah rah rah – then come back home not to the little stacked cookie box living quarters with front stoops smack dab on the sidewalks of narrow streets as they rhetorically promote, but to a lifestyle that affords them spacious homes with attached yards for which they defend and justify by making carbon credit pay offs from the money they receive telling others how they should live. I think I just described a hypocrite!

Maybe the first question that should be asked all three of these candidates is what type of home they live in, the square footage and how much property does it sit on? Only then can the conversation begin!

What a lovely conceptual world.

Density?

Ok, so what density over the past 25 years do you want to see more of across the region? Where? And will it all have to be tax subsidized?

SoWa? Orenco Station? Cascade Station? Villebois? Clackamas Town Center urban renewal? TODs stuck in neighborhoods? Infill housing crowded into less dense neighborhoods? The Round At Beaverton? Metro's mandated small lot-crowded subdivisions? Gresham Station? Pearl District? Gateway? Expand WES? Light rail on Barbur and 99? More light rail everywhere? Continued UGB expansions that aren't workable? Planners composing 30 year bike plans? Climate Actions plans?

If it's dense, you like it?

Density is great for someone else. I prefer to have a little space.

Density is great for someone else. I prefer to have a little space.

ditto. I'll keep my lawn, flower and vegetable gardens, fruit trees, and chicken coop thank you very much.

If everyone's packed into the city like sardines that just makes the city more like Manhattan island. Not my idea of nice place to live.

Remember... all things in moderation.

Density may or may not be great, but not in the eyes of the average voter. I love Manhattan or Chicago or Boston or San Francisco or Vancouver BC as much as anybody, but when I get back home I want my acre and my house and to be left alone. Economics or environmental concerns might force people to give up their homes in Ladd's Addition and move into high rise condos some day, but that day is not here yet and linking the push for increased urban density to the Democratic Party and Progressive causes is, as I have said before, political suicide.

If you want/like high density living then Portland, Seattle and Vancouver are great places. For those who choose different lifestyles go to Medford, Bend or even Eugene. This one-size fits all centralized land-use planning is for the birds.

Density is relative. Everyone treats it like density = high rise condos. Sometimes density just means efficient land use. If cities are well planned people can have their yards and not have to sit in traffic to get anywhere at the same time. It doesn't have to be either or.

Also, "centralized land use planning?" Oregon's land use system doesn't require Bend to be like Portland. Far from it. It allows a hell of a lot of flexibility between cities. When you use terms like "centralized planning" in such a general sense, it's a dead give away that you haven't been paying very close attention but would rather just demonize the system as a whole.

I don't think anyone's proposing that we dictate the terms of growth to all our metro areas. But I'm willing to bet that as our energy sources and lifestyles change, higher density areas are going to fare a lot better than the slapdash models of expansion more in the mode in Bend and Medford.

Actually, Salem dictates what UGB's should look like. Salem dictates lot size and setbacks. Salem dictates everything. Then, when they don't like the way the local elected and/or appointed authorities are doing things, politicians (again in Salem) come in and usurp the process.

Hmm, sure sounds like centralized planning to me.

<h2>And those of us in the rest of the state like our ways just fine. If you like being packed in on top of each other that is what Portland is for.</h2>