Four the future - January 4

And we're back! Today: planning is contentious, greenhouse planning, skyscrapers, and another of poverty's costs.

  • The quest to designate Portland's growth areas sets counties against each other
    Source: The Oregonian, 091227
    Summary: Washington, Clackamas, and Multnomah Counties, Oregon, will increase in population by one million in the next 20 years. Washington County is arguing that it is the economic engine of the region and need extra space for growth. Clackamas County agrees with the Washington County Farm Bureau, saying that too much farmland is being destroyed by Washington's proposals. Metro, which is responsible for creating the plan, has offered a map which creates 24,000 acres of additional urban reserve areas and 224,000 acres of rural reserve lands (pdf map, 7.22MB). The intent is to allow for 40-50 years of predictability for both government, and private sector decision makers. There are nine areas on the map where there is disagreement.
    Opinion: Portland, Oregon, and its suburbs are the poster children of good urban planning. It is instructive, therefore, to realize that even when the broad goals of growth management are embraced, there is contention. Just because there's disagreement doesn't mean that planning, as a function, is a failure. Indeed, if everyone always agreed, neither planning nor politics would ever be necessary.

  • Air Quality Guidelines Face Unexpected Critics
    Source: The New York Times, 091226
    Summary: San Francisco will soon be responsible for regulating the emission of greenhouse gases. The guidelines being considered by the air pollution control authority would cause larger developments, both suburban and urban, to pay fees for emissions mitigation. Previously, developments in previously urban areas were exempt from environmental review.
    Opinion: A couple of the problems with some planning schemes is that they exempt small projects and only lay requirements on larger ones, and they treat each project as an individual problem rather than as a part of a regional issue. For example, here in Washington, you can use water from a residential well without a permit. As a consequence, thousands of individual wells have been drilled. Each one has limited impact, but as a group, it's having a major impact on those who have issued water rights. Shared resources, such as water and air, could be managed by individual requirements mitigated through a transfer of development responsibilities.

  • Redefining skyscraper
    Source: The Spokesman-Review, 100104
    Summary: The Dubai Tower, Burj Dubai in Arabic, opened Monday under tight security. The actual height has been kept a secret, but it is reported to be 2,684 feet. The second tallest occupied building in the world is the Taipei 101 at 1,667 feet. Not only is Burj Dubai the tallest occupied building, but also the tallest structure, beating out a broadcast mast in North Dakota.
    Opinion: First thought: this is a legacy of the real estate bubble, just like the massive housing bubble here in the United States. Just because there's money to do it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" can be defrauded, too. Second thought: I wonder what kinds of transportation assets they have for this massive structure. If they're dependent on automobiles, I wonder how many of its 124 stories is a parking garage. Third thought: The City of Spokane turned down the construction of the Rob Brewster's 32-story Vox Tower because it was one block outside the downtown core, which prevented the 300-foot tower from being built over 150 feet (amongst other objections which came along after the cited article). Currently the tallest building in Spokane is the 22-story, 288-foot Bank of America Building.



  • Poverty shortens healthy years
    Source: Los Angeles Times, 091228
    Summary: Poverty is the strongest predictor of poor health, even greater than lack of education, smoking, and obesity according to a study published online in the American Journal of Public Health on December 17, 2009. The average person who earns less than 200% of the federal poverty guideline, which is the bottom third of all earners, will lose 8.2 years of good health. Other factors reduced health expectancy less: smoking by 6.6 years, high school dropouts by 5.1 years, and obesity by 4.2 years.
    Opinion: Just like public safety and welfare, public health is a planning issue. If you want a growing community, with lots of available workers and low absenteeism costs, make sure your community pays well enough for people to have access to robust preventative medicine. If you don't, be prepared to get hit by high medical costs.

2 comments:

  1. The impact of poverty on health goes beyond preventive healthcare, don't you think? Bad food is cheaper than good food, and cooking nutritious food requires time and energy--which can be in short supply when a person is struggling just to get by. I believe the stress of being poor creates health issues also. In a country with our resources, how is it that anyone is hungry or without healthcare or homeless or scared for their children's safety?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Brian here is what I tried to add to your blog...

    The problem with development in Spokane is - it keeps missing the cycles. Though one could argue it's good we missed the last one - it's not totally true. We often get the bad without any (or much of the good). Low interest rates and strong development should have been driving things forward in Spokane over the last 5 years. Unfortunately the market rate for apartments and office space severely lags resulting in little demand for future project. Though I firmly believe we have a downtown housing demand.. it's just hard to assess without much housing being there in the first place (market analysis). Tacoma added some 10,000 housing units over the last few years.. Spokane.. ugh, roughly about 200. Pathetic. The City has not been very receptive either - projects get denied because 1 or 2 people complain (though many more are for it) and the City management does not understand the need to get out of the way. More development will mean a more sustainable economy which in turn will mean more taxes. We have little to no development going on now - why not get projects going by asking the state to forgive sales tax on construction and getting the city to forego permit costs and streamline the process. In return, people will get back to work, density will increase.. meanwhile property tax revenue will increase and we'll all be better off (last time I checked sales tax on ZERO dollars worth of construction meant ZERO tax dollars collected... - unfortunately the legislature and governor have a different calculator than most of us). Why not use this time to create incentives and get something good going?

    ReplyDelete

This is an interactive blog for people interested planning in the Spokane region or planning in general.