Credit When Credit's Due

Kudos to Elizabeth Hovde, the conservative opinion writer for the Oregonian, who penned a quite moderate screed today about Metro's Urban Growth Boundary battles. She pointed out that the farmland in Washington County and around the rest of the Portland Metro Area is a valuable resource to be preserved and enhanced, not eviscerated and bulldozed. Not quite your typical "in house righty columnist," eh BlueOregon? Can you imagine David Reinhard writing that column?

Let's give credit where credit for moderate Republicanism is due, BlueOregon. Unless you are such partisan Dem hacks that you don't care, or want to actually discourage moderate Republicanism as a threat to Democratic party primacy in Oregon.

I'm awaiting the praise ...

UPDATE: MONDAY MORNING 10/5/09: Didn't have to wait long. Thanks, BlueOregon, for giving credit where credit is due. I don't agree with BlueOregon that the pavers and the no-growthers have gone away, it's just that events of the past two years have taken away their thunder. If and when growth heats up again in Portland, both groups will be back in force.

Uh Oh ...

Well, this won't do much for my profession:

Mohammed Atta was an Urban Planning Graduate Student!

And his thesis sounds like it takes "neo-traditionalism" to extremes.

Which makes an interesting point - going back to traditional forms of cities should NOT mean going back to traditional forms of culture, such as Islamic misogyny. That seems an obvious point to me, but it appears that Mohammed Atta didn't get it.

More Libertarian Hypocrisy

From Dave Lister, in the Oregonian. Lister is a failed city council candidate and favorite of Jack Bog.

Which is too bad, because where Lister is starting, he's right on this one. Metro is being wooden-headed when it refuses to let Cornelius add some land to its urban growth boundary for employment uses. It's an example of the "up not out" dogma taken to its (il)logical extreme.

But Lister doesn't stop there - he continues with a broadside against the whole Oregon and Metro Portland planning system. And shows his true colors - this libertarian is against giving people choices in the way they live. To make my case:

1. A snide comment about $100,000 to pay for new bicycle lockers. Lister apparently thinks everyone WANTS to drive a car, which doesn't explain the thousands of new bicyclers on our streets every day. Secure lockers is part of giving people riding bicycles that CHOICE - a choice Lister would deny them.

2. Then the big one - we are all being forced into "suburbs ... built so close to one another you can't swing a nine iron between them," and "skinny row houses infest Portland's stately old neighborhoods like some kind of melanoma." Meanwhile, suburban development occurring in Clark, Columbia, and Yamhill Counties, where they are "resistant to the smart-growth bug," is negating all this.

What Lister and his ignorant libertarian brigade appear to be clueless to (assuming that they are not knaves to begin with and know well the consequences of what they are espousing), is that small suburban plots, skinny row houses and, yes, the high rise and mid-rise condominiums and apartments Lister undoubtedly hates, are giving people CHOICES. There remain tens of thousands of single-family homes on large lots for those who would prefer that lifestyle, and as Lister points out, more are still being built. Lister is trapped in a time-warp of 1950's suburban mentality - the majority of today's households are not single families with two parents and two or more children, and they don't want to live on a 1,000 square meter subdivision lot. But Lister wouldn't give them that choice, in part by pandering to those who would use zoning laws to prevent housing choice in their neighborhoods. Does that sound very "libertarian" to you?

3. As for his transportation spouts, Lister claims that our average commute speed on freeways is 19 miles per hour (not true), makes fun of MAX, and implies that we need more freeways, not MAX. Once again, no choice for the percentage of Portlanders who can't or don't want to, drive everywhere. And no thought to the massive government intervention in the form of eminent domain condemnation of property and blighting of existing neighborhoods in the elusive chase for free-flowing freeway traffic.

Lister, a person "to stop goofball antics at City Hall," according to Jack Bog when he endorsed him, is throwing up the usual libertarian goofball obfuscations in his attack on CHOICE in the way we live.

No, Bogdanski, it's "Asian-style Human Warehousing"

More proof that the Jack Bogs and Jim Karlocks and Antiplanners of the world are emulating Canute by fighting the tides, as highrises come to suburbia because people want to live in them. Namely, many immigrants from East and South Asia.

Now I know none of these gentlemen are bigots, so I wouldn't expect any of them to argue that the solution to this "problem" is to exclude East and South Asians from this country. What they would probably argue is that these poor deluded souls have been brainwashed by conditions in their benighted native lands, and that after a few years living in the Soviet-style warehouses they will see the light and flock to single-family housing.

Maybe, maybe not. It's all about "choice," and as long as the market and government make sure people have a choice of the type of housing they want, they are both doing their job. It's when ideology gets in the way, either in the form of those wanting to abolish the single-family residence as environmentally wasteful, or those who want to abolish multi-family housing as un-American, that the problems start.

Helvetia and the Urban Growth Boundary

This story, in the Oregonian, is the latest in the great battle of the Portland Metropolitan Area and its urban growth boundary. Here's the Washington County land use/zoning map. Helvetia is generally north of Hillsboro and also north of Highway 26, and east of the city of North Plains.

First, there's a temporary air of unreality in this whole discussion, given the thousands of empty lots and unsold homes the Portland area today. But now's the time to fix things, as opposed to waiting until the demands of new growth a decade or so from now cannot be met.

Next, we have the exogenous variable problem, a.k.a. "Clark County." It offers a giant escape valve should Oregonians refuse to accommodate new growth. And, barring changes in the U.S. Constitution or some factor that makes the Pacific Northwest an extremely undesirable place, new growth will be coming to this area. Putting all new growth into Clark County has some highly undesirable impacts on our transportation system and economy. I suppose for those with lots of money turning Portland into a backwater is quite ideal. It won't be ideal for their kids, but they don't seem to perceive that fact, or care about it even if they do perceive it.

And then there's the GREAT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION PARADOX. The state land use goals strongly point toward urban growth expansion onto marginal and "exception" lands, those not suitable for extensive farm and forest operations. Any attempt to expand onto high value farm and forest lands will be struck down if marginal and "exception" lands are also available for the urban growth boundary expansion. And that certainly makes sense, in terms of preserving Oregon's commercial agricultural economy. I don't know if we really want extensive forestry operations immediately adjacent to the Portland urban area, but commercial forest lands also tend to be lands that have steeper slopes, and thus their urbanization would cause significant environmental problems that are expensive for new development to mitigate.

So Metro goes first to the "exception" lands. However, these lands are generally unfit for commercial farming or forestry because they have already been divided into smaller lots and have lots of people already living there. And these people moved out into places like Beavercreek (near Oregon City), Stafford (near West Linn and Lake Oswego), and Helvetia. They like things just the way they are, and will vigorously oppose extension of the urban growth boundary. Meanwhile, the farm and forest lands "off limits" are in large parcels, easier to plan and develop wisely, with a few residents who are generally ekeing out a resource-based living right now and will slobber over the dollars offered by the developers.

My solution for Helvetia? The map makes it obvious. Designate the area south of Highway 26 and the area north of Highway 26 and east of Cornelius Pass Road as urban reserves. Allow a small area for expansion around the City of North Plains, which has been eager to grow for a couple of decades now. Make the area north of Highway 26 and west of Cornelius Pass Road a rural reserve. A four-lane divided highway would seem to be an excellent "buffer between urban and rural development.

And take the recommendations of the "Big Look" to decentralize sclerotic statewide planning goals to allow a flexible solution such as I've just proposed.

Cell Towers are Health Hazards? No Way.

People hate new cell towers for mobile telephony, although there is a logical disconnect regarding their use - I've heard of local planners getting telephone calls from people irate about a new cell tower application - calling from their cell phones.

But there's no proven link between cell tower emissions and cancer - don't take my word for it:

American Cancer Society
Wireless Week
Lawrence Laboratory Professor

Compare these sources to the often hysterical-sounding, science-free conspiracy theories of those who think cell towers pose health risks. Just google the term and you'll find plenty.

Fortunately for all in this situation the Federal Government bowed to common sense and precluded local governments from trotting out health concerns as a reason to deny cell tower applications. This, of course, is another peg in the conspiracy theories.

Perhaps I'm being too hard on these people. There are plenty of things in the modern world that have proven to be real health risks. But cell towers aren't one of them.

Strange Bedfellows? Maybe not ...

And now let's look at my other "favorite" blogger, Mr. O'Toole the ANTIPLANNER. O'Toole is much more intellectually coherent than Professor Bogdanski. Like the Bog-man, he's even sometimes right (he supports congestion pricing). But more often he's wrong, sometimes spectacularly wrong.

And his most recent post is a great example of his wrong-headedness. The Antiplanner should by all rights be applauding this building, which is a sign of market forces at work. People want to live in inner SE Portland, and the old nice-looking house on the site previously didn't fit very many of them in. The new building does. It's telling that O'Toole clucks over the prices of the condos, and then notes that 20 of the 27 have sold in these terrible economic times. Hmmmm.... maybe Mr. Antiplanner isn't such a fan of "the market" when "the market" doesn't promote the suburban and rural sprawl he seems to love?

As for the building itself, the subject of fits of spleen from both Bogdanski and O'Toole, it is a bit on the, er, "modern" side of the architectural scale. I suppose it could have been dressed up with brick and some onion domes to make it look like a Russian Orthodox Muscovite cathedral, but that might cause a few more issues. Actually, the building looks fine to this overlord - and if over 70% of the units are sold it seems that a few others agree with me.

Just Say No. Always.

It's been exactly one year since the last post on this worthy blog.

And our old "friend" continues his tirades.

Note the complete crank-fest in the comments section. Perhaps he's expelled all contrary voices from his blog - I found a reference to noted Republican crazy (NOT!) Jack Roberts getting the boot a while back.

And note the slam upon a new target, a State Representative who dares to disagree with the blog proprietor. And a vicious ad hominem attack to boot.

But back to substance - roads get wear and tear, and a car that is driven 10,000 miles a year on those roads has more impact than a car that is driven 1,000 miles a year on those same roads. And an SUV weighing 10,000 lbs. has more impact when driven on those roads than a Mini-Cooper weighing 4,000 lbs.

The current gasoline tax is a rough calculator for apportioning the costs of keeping roads and building new ones on an equitable basis. And it's getting rougher - should a Prius driver pay only half what a Mini-Cooper driver pays for road upkeep because his car uses only half the gas, but weighs more?

So taxing cars based upon actual miles driven on our roads makes sense. As for figuring out exactly how to do it in a non-intrusive way - that's a subject for more work, once the concept is accepted.

UPDATE: Jack Bog's spyware has noted the re-emergence of this blog. Amid the usual lies: (motto: "Soviet-style human warehousing is Portland's only hope"), one of his commenters, "Ben," has this to say, among more vicious ad hominem attacks, in comment # 10, reprinted in part here:

Roads don't get wear and tear from cars, period. A car that is driven 10,000 miles a year on those roads has the same impact as a car that is driven 1,000 miles. None.
The same as an SUV weighing 10,000 lbs. and the same as a Mini-Cooper weighing 4,000 lbs. None.

Large freight rucks and other heavy vehicles along with studds wear out roads. Not cars.

In response:

1. Ben denies basic gravity with his absolute assertion. Admittedly, a heavily-laden truck has much more impact than a car on a road's surface. But impact upon a road's surface is proportional to a vehicle's weight. Does Ben claim that bicycles have the same impact upon a road surface than car's do? (Perhaps he does ...)

2. And Ben conveniently leaves out my other point - that a vehicle's impact upon the roadway is becoming increasingly divorced from the amount of gasoline needed to propel the vehicle.

Back to the Soviet planning libel from the Bog-man - I urge my dozen or so readers to peruse my past archives to determine how my advocacy of more choice for Portland's residents in their life patterns constitutes totalitarianism.

The Flanders Bike Bridge Imbroglio

For those of you who haven't heard, the big rage in the Planning Overlord world - transportation division has been the proposal to reuse the old Sauvie Island Bridge (being replaced by a new structure) as a "new" bicycle/pedestrian bridge over I-405 at Flanders Street. A good summary of the issues can be found in this Portland Tribune article.

This was a close call in the mind of this particular urban planning overlord, until I read in, of all places, here, an excellent additional complication. Jack Bog has just tipped the scales - the additional complications for freeway off-ramps and cars on 14th and 16th should kill this project off for good.

I know the bike/alternative modes proponents will just say "but the cars just won again!" Yes, they did. It's one thing to mess around with local circulation patterns for a block or two. I have no problem with that. It's another to mess around with freeway onramps and offramps.

And kudos to the original research from Jack Bog, just like he did with the newspaper racks a few months ago. Too bad his views are encrusted with such bitterness.

Gnashing of Teeth to Commence (Again)

If I remember correctly, a certain notorious blogger to remain un-named (but linked to here) was agog and outraged, along with his small but cranky contingent, that Metro would actually subsidize Transit Oriented Development (the horror! - but I can't find a specific link, perhaps the unnamed blogger can enlighten us all as to where, if anywhere, it is?). It turns out that not only the cranky blogger noticed, but so did the American Planning Association, which gave Metro one of its national awards for planning excellence.

And here are the photos to go along with the article:





But who would want monstrosities like these when we would have kept Portland the way it was in the 1970's and had "Newark of the Northwest" by now?

A Small Town Turns its Back on Immigrants - and Prosperity

FROM "PLANNING," THE MAGAZINE OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION, EXCERPTS FROM AN ARTICLE IN THE MARCH 2008 ISSUE ENTITLED "LA VIDA LOCAL." IT'S THE STORY OF A SMALL TOWN IN NEW JERSEY, AND THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF PASSING DRACONIAN ANTI-IMMIGRANT LAWS (THE MAGAZINE IS BEHIND A SUBSCRIPTION WALL)

"The law wasn't enforceable. All it did was scare people," says Ed Robins, a self-described "aging hippie." He's standing otuside the Riverside Arts Guild, his music story and recording studio in Riverside, New Jersey, across the Delaware River from suburban Philadelphia. "One of my musicians was Brazilian, and when his landlord threatened him with exposure, he went home."

Robins is talking about a series of events that began in the summer of 2006 in this old factory town of 8,000. That's when the Riverside Township became the first muncipality in the state to enact legislation penalizing those who knwoingly rented to or employed undocumented immigrants. In deciding to do so, it joined dozens of other communities that are addressing one of the nation's hottest issues: how to handle the more than 10 million immigrants (both legal and illegal) who have entered the country since 2000, a total that's the largest in any seven-year period in American history.

Ed Robins represents one point of view in Riverside. Mark Remsa has a different take on the matter. "It's a matter of ensuring proper population density - and not overcrowding," says Remsa, director of economic development and regional planning for Burlington County, New Jersey, which encompasses Riverside. "That means that building codes are paid attention to and violations are enforced."

Immigrants have been coming to Riverside since the 1960's. Many of the first wave came from Portugal, creating a comfort zone for the latest group of newcomers - the Brazilians - who share a language and culture. Between 2000 and 2006, local officials estimate, more than 3,000 immigrants (both legal and not) arrived. Residents grew used to seeing "Brazilian Cadillacs," their term for the white vans that waited curbside to transport construction crews to work sites, and businesses on the main street welcomed the yellow and green flags that flapped outside stores, knowing that they brought customers downtown.

Yet some residents said the clannish manner of the foreigners made them feel uneasy. "I felt like a minority myself," says Nicole Forssell, a crossing guard and mother of three. "I felt they were always staring at us, and I was uncomfortable that they spoke in their own language to each other."

So when the ordinance passed, it didn't do so quietly Hundreds of demonstrators gathered - in protest and in support - causing enough of a ruckus that police cordoned off the town'a main streets. Within months, though, the streets took on a markedly different aspect. As Brazilians and Latin Americans fled Riverside, they left behind the dozen or so businesses - bodegas and restaurants, hair salons, and Western Union offices - that had catered to them. Today, Scott Street, the town's main drag, is deserted, the shops empty.

"People used to line up outside the supermarket before it even opened. Now nobody comes," says Enrique, a Brazilian behind the counter at a Mini-Market lined with shelves of coconut milk and "tostines" crackers. "Our city was beautiful; now it's sad," he sighs. "I look out the window and all I see is ghosts."

Mike Law, a landlord who says he counts many immigrants on his rent rolls, believes the Brazilians kept the streets hopping. "A lot of these stores were empty until the Brazilians came here," he says. "They opened businesses and they patronized businesses. To me, they were the Irish and the Italians of the 21st century. I think people were jealous of their success in a town that, frankly, had fallen behind the eight ball."

Robins echoes the sentiment. "There was a cold reality here after a whole: we saw that our economic base was ruined and that the ordiance was wrong. It created nothing but prejudice and separation."

It took about a year for the realization to sink in, but in September 2007 the town rescinded the ordinance. The rules were never enforced, anyway, as several human rights and business groups sued after the law was enacted in July 2006. "I don't think people knew there would be such an economic burden," says Mayor George Conard, who had voted for the legislation as a township commissioner.

IF THIS WILL HAPPEN IN A SMALL TOWN IN NEW JERSEY, WHAT IS THE FATE OF A STATE LIKE ARIZONA WHICH HAS JUST PASSED DRACONIAN ANTI-IMMIGRANT LEGISLATION AFFECTING THE STATE AND ITS SIX MILLION RESIDENTS?

WE HEAR JAMMERINGS ABOUT THE ECONOMIC DRAIN OF IMMIGRANTS, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL, BUT THEIR PRESENCE HERE IS, BY DEFINITION, AN ECONOMIC PLUS FOR OUR NATION - AND THOSE CITIES AND STATES THAT HAVE DECIDED TO SCAPEGOAT THEM ARE, I SUSPECT, GOING TO BE FINDING THAT OUT SOON.

1000 Friends of Oregon - the ACLU of Oregon Land Use

I'm glad the ACLU is around to represent its viewpoint, but I'm also glad that there aren't a lot of ACLU members in Congress because I don't agree with their 1st amendment extremism.

Similarly, I'm glad 1000 Friends of Oregon exists to be a watchdog for the extreme implementation of "good land use planning," but I don't think it's a good idea to elect former heads of the organization to seats on local governing bodies.

Case in point, Robert Liberty, who led the Metro torpedoing of poor Cornelius' attempts to get some industrial land into its city and shore up it's miserably puny tax base. Manipulating Oregon's land use laws, Liberty has choked off a community's needed economic development, all in the name of a purist ideal of land use planning in Oregon.

It's the reason Measure 37 passed. Liberty and the 1000 Friends still just don't get it. It's not 1973 any more.

Antiplanner hates proposed rail line

Sort of a "dog bites man" story, I know. The antiplanner is aghast that Portland may be spending over a billion dollars on a light rail line to Milwaukie, 8 miles south.

Never mind that it will serve Southeast Portland and Sellwood before it gets to Milwaukie.

Never mind that building a new freeway on the same route would cost how much exactly?

Never mind that bus rapid transit lines on their own right of way would cost just about as much.

Never mind that, as traffic gets more snarled, the antiplanner's sneer that he could ride his bike faster than the light rail trains will soon be matched by a sneer that he could ride his bike faster than automobile traffic along the same route.

Never mind that a light rail and bike only bridge across the Willamette will increase the antiplanner's and other bike riders' safety.

Never mind that the rail line will give transportation users CHOICE.

Never mind, antiplanner.

Jack Bog wants Rockwood to remain a slum

I guess he's so mistrustful of the work that Homer Williams has done to turn a junked-out portion of Northwest Portland into a hated icon of hipness that he's willing to flush the good and despairing citizens of Rockwood down the toilet so that his anti-Homer purity can be maintained.

Exclusive bike lanes on Salmon and Taylor in Downtown PDX

A while back, during the bicycle deaths controversies, I started contemplating how the city could create exclusive and safe bicycle lanes by retrofitting some streets. My first look was at the east-west street system.

And here's my plan (pardon the poor penmanship!):

Start with a central east-west couplet system that isn't used as a bridge approach to the east or a major artery approach to the west, and isn't used for light rail. There's one couplet that fits the bill - Taylor and Salmon.

Now take those two streets and create a central exclusive one-way bike lane on each - toward the river on Salmon, toward the hills on Taylor. It would be at least 12 feet wide. It would be separated from the vehicle lanes on either side of it by some sort of barrier or curb. The vehicle lanes on either side would be preserved mainly for local deliveries to the adjacent businesses and driveway access for any parking garage entrances and the like - but on-street parking would be gone and as you can see from my drawing, Salmon and Taylor would no longer be one-way - plus they would no longer function as through streets since traffic would be directed back onto a north-south street at each intersection.

At the river the bike couplet would connect to Waterfront Park and car-free bicycle routes there. I haven't figured out what would happen at the PGE Park end of things - that's for someone else to figure out!

Bicycles would have to obey the signal lights at all cross streets. Perhaps signals would be installed at the park blocks intersections and any west of I-405 that weren't already signalized.

A key point here is the physical separation between the bicycle lane and the service auto lanes on each side along Taylor and Salmon. Any vehicle drifting or veering into the common lane would have some sort of curb or barrier to contend with.

Next I'll contemplate exclusive bicycle lanes on the north-south streets.

I'm sure there's something wrong with this plan, please let me know!

Slow Down Just Ahead

I've been doing this blog for a year now. I've got some other things going on in my life (all good), so this blog will be going into slowdown mode. I will occasionally post something that catches my eye or piques my interest or allows me to make an important point, but that will be a much rarer occasion for now.

Thanks for reading, all five of you!

Why do valuable commercial properties sit unused for 15 years?

Because their owners are acting in an economically irrational manner. As is occurring on two sites in the strongest local commercial market in Portland, in the Northwest 21st-23rd area.

Sometimes property owners like these ones refuse to respond to lures and baits set by us urban planning overlords that are based upon a supposition that the property owners so lured will act in an economically rational manner.

And perhaps us urban planning overlords just need to accept that fact and move on to our next project.

What About New Orleans?

The Oregonian has an excellent couple of articles by Chris Beck on why New Orleans should be rebuilt and how it can be made better.

Admittedly, it is tempting to just chuck it all and say "adieu" to a city that is largely below sea level and in the path of hurricanes made stronger (perhaps) by global warming.

Beck's key punchline, "New Orleans is our Venice," has a lot of weight. And its a great argument for rebuilding that part of New Orleans that should be rebuilt, like the French Quarter and the older, historic parts of the City. But it's not an argument for bringing back neighborhoods that never should have been built in the first place.

New Orleans has an important place in our nation. But it should be a much smaller place (at least in terms of population) than it was before. After all, how many people still live in Venice?

Street Names

You'll notice that I did not compose a single post on the issue of Interstate Avenue vs. Cesar Chavez Boulevard, or Fourth Avenue vs. Cesar Chavez Boulevard. My only oblique contribution to the debate was a suggestion on Jack Bog's Blog that the City cajole some developer to name a new residential street "Cesar Chavez Court."

That's because the issue of how to honor Cesar Chavez is not an urban planning issue - it is an issue of perceptions, not reality. And, despite what Jack Bog or the Antiplanner might tell you, true urban planning overlords want to impose their will upon the populace in ways that will change our lives for the better in a concrete and substantive way. The big story on Interstate Avenue is its transformation by light rail from a run-down dead-end through street into a well-populated prosperous transit-based community - and how best to achieve or frustrate that transformation. The story remains the same whatever the street is named.

Book Review: The Devil in the White City

A great book, with an urban planning angle, about the 1893 Columbian Exposition Worlds Fair in Chicago, the famous "White City," and the parallel machinations of America's first notorious serial killer, H.H. Holmes (among other aliases). A must read for life in America's "Second City" at the end of the Victorian Era.

Notice: Urban Planning Overlords Needed in Los Angeles

An interesting take on the ultimate urban planning challenge - Los Angeles, California. The writer, a planner, comes to the conclusion that the only thing that can save Los Angeles from choking on its own traffic is - PLANNING!

One additional thought of mine - much of Los Angeles is flat, and there are A LOT of wide surface streets. How about a dense network of bicycle-only routes?

As I have noted in earlier threads, at least downtown Los Angeles is drinking the Portland Kool-Aid!

Hope for the East Side

Maybe Portland's east side and east suburbs (beyond the I-205 freeway) aren't doomed after all. Gresham is trying to turn the tide in Rockwood. A shuttered big box, a light rail line nearby, and tax increment financing available - it sounds like something good could come of this. I hope my prediction about the far east side turns out to be wrong - here is a test, we can check back in a few years.

NIMBYs in Milwaukie

In Milwaukie, an attempt to frustrate the placement of a home for "the others" in the Ardenwald neighborhood has been stymied, because the City of Milwaukie has bought the property. I'm sure they paid a premium to steal it from under the nose of Clackamas County, but this will probably get all the existing Council re-elected, or at least not recalled (as has been known to happen i Milwaukie).

The reason Milwaukie had to buy the property? Federal law is very strict that local zoning can't be used to keep these kinds of facilities out of neighborhoods, for the very good reason that otherwise there would be no place that allowed them.

On a broad public policy level, the actions of the City of Milwaukie are, of course, demagogic and frustrating to the goal of bringing people like these criminals back into society - and this type of facility has a much greater rate of success than fenced institutions deep in industrial areas do. On the other hand, would I want such a facility in my neighborhood? Of course not.

Book Review - On Trial

By Gerald Dickler. An episodic book of "great" trials throughout history, the first being Socrates in 399 BC, then on through Jesus, Joan of Arc, Dreyfus, the Scopes Trial, the Moscow Purge Trials, the Nuremburg Trials, and a few others. The actual transcripts of proceedings are skippable, but the book gives a good synopsis of these famous proceedings and their surroundings. Written in 1961, so expect it to be out of print.

Book Review - Mutiny on the Bounty

And oldie, but definitely not moldy. A ripping good sea adventure yarn, if not great literature, then at least Captain Bligh and Fletcher Christian became a pretty important part of 20th century popular culture. I recommend it. Written in 1932, and followed by two sequels, Men at Sea (which I read many years ago), a great account of Captain Bligh's brilliant voyage from near Tahiti to Indonesia with the cast-offs from the Bounty, and Pitcairn Island (which I haven't read), an account of Fletcher Christian and the fate of the main mutineers.

Ay Caramba! More Portland in LA

It's continuing to happen. The Portland Kool-aid comes to the center of car culture and sprawl development (albeit that's been changing for many years now, as mountains and oceans that can't be built on have limited sprawl). And the new champion buildings in the south part of downtown Los Angeles are being built by Portlanders. It's not just New York that thinks Portland is a grand place now. And it's unclear from the article whether the dreaded Homer Williams (cue spooky music) is involved in "South Group," the developers.

For those of us who last saw downtown Los Angeles almost 20 years ago the transformations occurring there must be amazing.

Green? Sure, as long as my view isn't spoiled!

A recent disgusting occurrence along the Columbia River in Vancouver (U.S.) is not unique. Trees in a city park along the river are being surreptitiously felled, and the prime suspects are luxury homeowners wanting a view of the river.

The same thing happened a few years back at the edge of Portland's Rose City Golf Course, except in that case the trees were girdled and left to slowly die.

All sort of imprecations involving the term "selfish elitist suburban mindset" come to mind, but I think the best way to respond is thus: "Instead of enjoying the view of the river, why don't you enjoy the view of the trees?"