Urban Growth Boundry (Bend, Redmond: 2013, new construction, utilities)

[Coniferian]

I've been photo documenting some of the tremendous growth the area has seen recently, at least here in Redmond. Lately I've been doing grabs from Google's street view before they become updated. I thought this one was a good contrast: NW Hemlock in Redmond from April 2012 to April 2018.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Coniferian

I've been photo documenting some of the tremendous growth the area has seen recently, at least here in Redmond. Lately I've been doing grabs from Google's street view before they become updated. I thought this one was a good contrast: NW Hemlock in Redmond from April 2012 to April 2018.

It's scary, what is happening. I'm not sure anything can be done to stop it. Unfortunately I think Oregon is going to become one big over populated state, just like California.

[Squidlo]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

It's scary, what is happening. I'm not sure anything can be done to stop it. Unfortunately I think Oregon is going to become one big over populated state, just like California.

With 4.2 million people in all of Oregon 98,466 square miles its not really crowded. Just feels like it.

All of Harris County Texas (Houston) clocking in at 4.5 million people in 1777 sq miles. Lots of room here still.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Squidlo

With 4.2 million people in all of Oregon 98,466 square miles its not really crowded. Just feels like it.

All of Harris County Texas (Houston) clocking in at 4.5 million people in 1777 sq miles. Lots of room here still.

100 years ago California had just 3 million people in 163,696 square miles, and Oregon is growing faster than California. In another 100 years, Oregon will look exactly like California. The forests will all be completely gone and replaced with million dollar McMansions. Actually they will probably be billion dollar McMansions by that time. The future is not bright. I'm just glad I will not be around to see it.

[kapetrich]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

100 years ago California had just 3 million people in 163,696 square miles, and Oregon is growing faster than California. In another 100 years, Oregon will look exactly like California. The forests will all be completely gone and replaced with million dollar McMansions. Actually they will probably be billion dollar McMansions by that time. The future is not bright. I'm just glad I will not be around to see it.

That's what the State law UGB is for...I hope it stays strong.

Another link.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by kapetrich

That's what the State law UGB is for...I hope it stays strong.

Another link.

Important part:

If more land is needed within a UGB,
clarify which land should be
considered first based upon:

All that does, is controls which land will be developed first. The debate is not if it should be developed, but rather which land will be developed first.

The only way I can see to prevent Oregon from being ruined by development, would be to completely freeze UGBs at their current size. I just don't see that happening.

The greedy developers won't stop until they develop every single inch of developable land. I have seen it happen. I lived in the Silicon Valley when they bulldozed the very last orchards.

This was their solution for preserving the agricultural history of the Santa Clara Valley. They cut down the very last cherry trees, so they could build a strip mall, but they saved the cherry stand on the property. So it could continue selling cherries, grown in Mexico.

[kapetrich]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

All that does, is controls which land will be developed first. The debate is not if it should be developed, but rather which land will be developed first.

The only way I can see to prevent Oregon from being ruined by development, would be to completely freeze UGBs at their current size. I just don't see that happening.

The greedy developers won't stop until they develop every single inch of developable land. I have seen it happen. I lived in the Silicon Valley when they bulldozed the very last orchards.

This was their solution for preserving the agricultural history of the Santa Clara Valley. They cut down the very last cherry trees, so they could build a strip mall, but they saved the cherry stand on the property. So it could continue selling cherries, grown in Mexico.

Silicon Valley/Santa Clara are exact examples of why Oregon has extremely strict UGB laws at the State level. To avoid that HORRIBLE mess. What Sata Clara has done is disgusting and in 1973, when creating the Oregon UGB laws, Southern California sprawl was the main example of what was to be avoided.

In 2006/2007 a new UGB was approved by Bend City council, but shot down at the State level because it was too heavy with it's expansion, and not enough on it's infill (aka, zero infill and all expansion because Bend is "different"). In the new UGB, which was just approved by the State, the focus of expansion was HEAVILY ratio'd to infill of the current UGB with some expansion which is normal.

I was part of the last UGB process and this is something I argued for both due to practicality, given the State laws and guidelines with the UGB/needing a new UGB STAT, and my values.

I encourage you to read about the law more in-depth. We need people like you to know what you're talking about so that the law is not slowly dismantled (which believe me some want) and we do not turn into exactly what you describe above.

Bend's UGB will need to be updated again in the near future so be ready

[Coniferian]

We've only been in Redmond since fall of 2013, but lately there's been a lot of infill around us in NW Redmond. Lots that builders left vacant have new construction on them now. One whole subdivision that had streets, sidewalks and utilities sitting for years is now being built out. And of course, there's the swath of what was empty fields from Maple down to Elm that's being jackhammered up.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by kapetrich

Silicon Valley/Santa Clara are exact examples of why Oregon has extremely strict UGB laws at the State level. To avoid that HORRIBLE mess. What Sata Clara has done is disgusting and in 1973, when creating the Oregon UGB laws, Southern California sprawl was the main example of what was to be avoided.

In 2006/2007 a new UGB was approved by Bend City council, but shot down at the State level because it was too heavy with it's expansion, and not enough on it's infill (aka, zero infill and all expansion because Bend is "different"). In the new UGB, which was just approved by the State, the focus of expansion was HEAVILY ratio'd to infill of the current UGB with some expansion which is normal.

I was part of the last UGB process and this is something I argued for both due to practicality, given the State laws and guidelines with the UGB/needing a new UGB STAT, and my values.

I encourage you to read about the law more in-depth. We need people like you to know what you're talking about so that the law is not slowly dismantled (which believe me some want) and we do not turn into exactly what you describe above.

Bend's UGB will need to be updated again in the near future so be ready

The solution, is to control our overpopulation problem, in the state, in the country, and in the world. We need to reverse population growth, and reduce the population. The only way for future generations to have a better quality of life is reduce the population so each person has more land and resources for themselves, not less. Even for people who don't believe we have a population problem now, it should be obvious that continuing to increase the population to spur development, can only ultimately lead to disaster. At some point the population will reach a critical mass, and it will no longer be sustainable with the amount of resources the planet has. Population growth has got to stop sometime. The sooner the better. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like most people are getting it.

[Squidlo]

Originally Posted by kapetrich

Silicon Valley/Santa Clara are exact examples of why Oregon has extremely strict UGB laws at the State level. To avoid that HORRIBLE mess. What Sata Clara has done is disgusting and in 1973, when creating the Oregon UGB laws, Southern California sprawl was the main example of what was to be avoided.
)

....And where are lots of newcomers to the Bend/Redmond area coming from?


I don't see Oregon's future as dark and swarming with people. Every place attracts people for a reason. Cities with seemingly no reason to exist are bedroom communities or satellites of other cities.

Example:The Southern Oregon coast is isolated by the coast range (logistics) and no large commerce nearby to sustain large population. Therefore, small population. The same applies to the whole state.