An island by design

This letter writer is correct in her summary of what effects the UGB has on 

housing.  Portland, and other growing metropolitan areas, are becoming islands 

of their own making - unaffordable and off limits to all but the wealthy.  

Government is doing as much to create social and economic inequality with 

the regulatory impacts on housing as disparity in job-related incomes do.  

The government solution is always to create another more drain on middle 

class incomes with subsidized housing.  No one ever gets rid of a bad government 

program (too many jobs at stake, or limited thinking).  

Wikipedia:  Rent Control

"Most economists believe that a ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing available.^[37][38] This view is based on analysis of empirical evidence as well as the understanding generated by theoretical models.^[39] Economists from differing sides of the political spectrum, such as Paul Krugman^[40] and Thomas Sowell,^[41] have criticized rent regulation as poor economics which, despite its good intentions, leads to the creation of less housing, raises prices, and increases urban blight.

Readers' Letters: Growth boundary makes Portland quite unaffordable

Portland Tribune, February 24, 2015  By Susan Blevins, Downtown Portland

I have been attending Portland city planning meetings since 1994. When the new zoning map changed my single-family home property to be zoned for high density, I decided I needed to keep a close eye on what was going on with the Portland Plan.

The mayor and the city planners roll their eyes when they see me coming. The following has been my argument for years. I always get applause from the other citizens when I speak.

Manhattan is an island. San Francisco is a peninsula. Only the rich and the subsidized poor can afford to live and work (or not work) in these space-bound cities. Homeownership is only for the wealthy. Businesses, property owners and the wealthy are heavily taxed to subsidize the poor and the social programs to promote so-called “equity.” The middle class is forced out of town or, at best, live in rent-controlled apartments.

With our urban growth boundary, we are effectively making our area an island. Soon, only the rich and the subsidized poor will find our area “affordable.”

All of the grandiose goals of the Portland Plan will require the densities and the high taxation of New York and San Francisco in order to be “sustainable.” Twenty-minute neighborhoods? No decent, affordable grocery/service establishment (without parking available) can be profitable enough to survive without subsidies or great density in the surrounding neighborhood.

As taxation and the cost of living in the area increases, more and more people and government-selected (Portland Development Commission) businesses will require some sort of subsidy in order to remain here. Subsidized living — jobs, housing, the arts, etc. — is not “affordable” living.

Consider what limiting space, increasing density, and high taxation to subsidize the poor and government programs do to a city. Businesses fail or move elsewhere. The middle class disappears by moving elsewhere or often becoming part of the poor.

With no middle class, the gap between rich and poor becomes more evident and divisive. Private property and farmlands become more precious, controlled and unaffordable. Businesses and the wealthy eventually search for more affordable places to do business and to live. Just look at how many of the newcomers to Portland are those fleeing unaffordable New York and San Francisco.

Susan Blevins

Downtown Portland