American Dream

Shopping center developer wants city to take last holdout to court
Land use planing in Oregon often ignores private property owners. Now the developer wants to use the power of the city government to condemn the Lowery property because they can't come to a agreement. The city has invested $4.5 million of taxpayers' money in to this project.

Despite opposition from downtown businesses and residents, Portland's city council voted to rebuild the downtown bus mall to include a light-rail line. The plan will cost $165 million and actually reduce the mall's capacity to move transit riders. This didn't matter to downtown opponents, who were only upset because the city wanted them to contribute $24 million to the project.

Condominium owners successfully got themselves exempted from the assessment, reducing property owners' share to $19 million. This left one city council member disgusted because churches and non-profit groups would have to pay while residents did not. But the bigger question was left unasked, which is why should light-rail be run down the bus mall at all?

The rail line is expected to continue from downtown south to Clackamas County. Voters rejected a property tax for this rail line in 1998, but regional leaders are intent on building it anyway. That's why they are trying to charge anyone and everyone they can in a desperate search for funding. For example, the city plans to make up some of the $5 million that residents won't pay by raising parking meter fees--again. (Currently, most parking meter fees go to subsidize Portland's streetcar.)

Clackamas County may get its light rail yet, not because its residents want it (they have consistently voted against it) or because there is any need for it (most commuter travel is east-west, not north-south), but because the county commission insists that, now that the other two counties in the region have their light-rail lines, it is time for Clackamas County to get its share of the pork.

Oregon's Transportation Commission, which is appointed by the governor (who has been a Democrat for nearly two decades), has resisted any expansion of Interstate 5, the main north-south route in the state. The Department of Transporation is currently replacing many of the bridges on the freeway, which would have been a great opportunity to expand the road's capacity. Even though the state's population has grown by 75 percent since the last major expansion (increasing the Portland-Salem segment from four to six lanes), the Commission insisted that new bridges allow no increase in capacity.

Now truck traffic on Interstate 5 has led to serious congestion all the way from Eugene to Portland. So the Commission has ordered the Department of Transportation to find an alternate truck route. The only viable alternative is old highway 99, which for the most part is a two-lane road that goes through the downtowns of many small and medium-sized towns. Naturally, the towns object to increased truck traffic.

The state can no longer pretend that people are going to stop driving. Transport advocates should demand that the state increase I-5's capacity or build an alternate four-lane freeway route between Portland and Eugene.

As cities and counties prepare to implement measure 37, opponents are trying to figure out how to kill it. One way is through the courts, another through the legislature. The measure goes into effect on December 2.

One possible court challenge would be to the measure's exemption for adult book stores. When Washington state property rights advocates put a compensation measure on the ballot, opponents claimed the measure would "subsidize pornographers" by requiring compensation for any zoning restriction against adult book stores. The measure lost, so the writers of measure 37 exempted adult book stores from the measure. Now environmentalists are expected to challenge the law on the ground that it unfairly abridges freedom of speech. Even if they win, it won't kill 37--instead, it is likely that all it will mean is that 37 applies to adult book stores in addition to everyone else.

In the legislature, which first meets in January, one senator has already proposed a bill to end measure 37's retroactivity. Measure 37 is retroactive to the date landowners purchased their land. Democratic Senator Kurt Schrader would maintain the compensation requirement for all future land-use rules but end the retroactive nature of measure 37. This is not likely to pass, but the legislature may still attempt to tinker with the law.

Few Oregon cities or counties have any money to pay people compensation for land-use rules that reduced their property values. "The result will be," says one county planner, "no enforcement of zoning regulations." While planning advocates will decry the results, the current situation is hardly defendable.

This article describes a family that has owned 5 acres near Salem for nearly 40 years--in other words, since before the state passed any land-use laws. Even though there are more than a dozen homes nearby, adjacent property owners and 1000 Friends of Oregon have blocked the family's attempts to build one house on their five acres. Now they will be allowed to build.

"This may be the beginning of the end of land-use planning," mourns one farmer who says he moved out of suburban Portland--probably the most heavily planned part of Oregon--because he wanted to get away from sprawl. Now he fears sprawl will come to him. But if people can build where they own land, instead of where government tells them to build, they won't need to concentrate in high-density areas.

Let's hope the farmer is right: this is the beginning of the end of land-use planning.

Residents of an unincorporated part of the Portland area successfully opposed annexation by a nearby city in order to prevent their low-density area from being converted to high-density developments. "We don't understand why every square inch of that mountain has to have houses crowded on it," says one of the residents.

This is a classic case of NIMBYism. While NIMBYism that stops any development and drives up housing costs can be bad, NIMBYism that stops social engineering in the form of smart-growth planning can be good.

The passage of Oregon's measure 37, which requires compensation to landowners whose property values are reduced by land-use regulation, threatens the integrity of the urban-growth boundaries that have been used to force high-density development in Portland and other Oregon cities. What is a planner to do?

The solution, says this article, is "jacking up fees," that is, impact fees or (as they are known in Oregon) system development charges. If cities and counties charge high fees for people who want to build homes in rural areas or near the urban fringe, but waive those fees for people doing infill or high-density developments, Oregon can maintain its reputation for ramming social engineering down the throats of its residents.

Paul Brooks, writing for the New York Times about the exurbs and their impact on American life and the election. Interesting commentary on the reality of the New American built environment versus the "downtown-centric" daydreams of Smart Growth planners and politicians.

Read the article here_ (NY times registration required)

November 8, 2004
G.O.P. Plans to Give Environment Rules a Free-Market Tilt
By FELICITY BARRINGER and MICHAEL JANOFSKY

WASHINGTON, Nov. 7 - With the elections over, Congress and the Bush administration are moving ahead with ambitious environmental agendas that include revamping signature laws on air pollution and endangered species and reviving a moribund energy bill that would open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to energy exploration.
In addition, the administration intends to accelerate conservation efforts by distributing billions of dollars to private landowners for the preservation of wetlands and wildlife habitats. The White House also plans to announce next month a new effort to clean up the Great Lakes.
The groundwork for the push was laid down in the past four years even as environmental groups, Congressional moderates and the courts put the brakes on major changes. But the election returns that gave Mr. Bush a clear victory and expanded the Republicans' majorities in Congress have emboldened those determined to hard-wire free-market principles into all environmental policy.
"The election is a validation of our philosophy and agenda," Michael O. Leavitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said in an interview. "We will make more progress in less time while maintaining economic competitiveness for the country. That is my mission."

Oregon's land use planners and government agencies are in a panic.

They have been treating citizens like Dorothy English as if they had no right to the property they bought under the rules of the county, city and state. Planners rezoned properties without permission of the owners and expected them to go along for the ride. Even if it made it impossible to build a home or use the property the way it was zoned when they bought it.

Planners were not concerned when they took value or rights from property owners in the past. That has all changed thanks to voters passing Measure 37.