is portland's economy that much worse than seattle? (Beaverton, Hillsboro: rent, buying a house)

[civic94]

I live in seattle now, and while comparing the two cities, its very compariable. population wise, seattle is a tad higher, weather is similar. everytime i go to portland, I would like to live there because buying a house is so much cheaper, and there is no tax on things, thats why im there in the first place.

but, is the economy that worse off? i mean the homes are a bargain over there, rent is cheaper, gas is cheaper, cars are cheaper, no tax.

[hamellr]

Yes. Portland is right on the edge of being a large metropolitan, but still has all the issues of a smaller city. Until Portland can attract more diversified corporations we're always going to be hit harder by ups and downs in the economy then other cities. It's changing though, Portland has more diversified corporations then it did even ten years ago, but we still have a long ways to go.

The other part is that unlike Seattle, Portland doesn't have several other fairly large cities to help ease the burden. Beaverton, Hillsboro, Vancouver are all growing fast, but they are and always will be suburbs of Portland. Oregon would have to remove the Urban Growth Boundaries totally to ever make Portland into a major city again, and that is less and less possible every year as the mistakes other states have made in not doing so become more obvious.

[turquoise1]

Hamellr, what are the urban growth boundaries, how to they prevent Portland from being a big city, and what mistakes have others made? I'm totally unfamiliar with these subjects, as a newcomer. I hope you don't mind my questions.

[hamellr]

Metro: Urban growth boundary and JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie will help you out.

[Nell Plotts]

Urban growth boundaries prevent urban sprawl, it prevents 'skip development'. It is adjusted when studies disclose that more urban land is needed. To the best of my knowledge that has only impacted the cost of land (developers can't easily expand to cheap farmland).

Seattle's economic strength is based on the presence of Microsoft, Boeing and the proximity of several military installations. Boeing's employment has been subject to huge swings both from the industry and business decision of their management. Portland's employers are much smaller and several are consumer discretionary companies.

I agree that Seattle's economy is stronger but the urban growth boundry law has nothing to do with that.

[khyron]

Originally Posted by turquoise1

Hamellr, what are the urban growth boundaries?

Making Sense of Place | Portland: Quest for the Livable City

This is an excellent, detailed documentary film explaining the Urban Growth Boundaries and how they came into being. The facts are presented well, supporting and dissenting voices are heard, and even recent controversies are covered. I always recommend it to friends who are interested in this rather unique Oregonian institution and its history.

(if you don't want to buy the DVD to watch it, many libraries have it available)

[turquoise1]

thanks!

I'm kind of surprised that this boundary exists, because the east side seems very sprawling to me.

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by turquoise1

thanks!

I'm kind of surprised that this boundary exists, because the east side seems very sprawling to me.

It would be worse without it, the boundary is designed to handle future growth. Within our UGB, we should be able to reach a much more dense city over time. There is issues with bringing density to already built neighborhoods, but that is a completely different issue.

[hamellr]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

I agree that Seattle's economy is stronger but the urban growth boundry law has nothing to do with that.

My apologies, what I meant and didn't get across was "With the Urban Growth Boundry large companies are not going to find Oregon an attractive place to move too if they need to build. They'll need to either remodel, or tear down and rebuild existing buildings to meet their needs."

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by hamellr

My apologies, what I meant and didn't get across was "With the Urban Growth Boundry large companies are not going to find Oregon an attractive place to move too if they need to build. They'll need to either remodel, or tear down and rebuild existing buildings to meet their needs."

Even still, Portland still has plenty of available land, it just isn't building office parks on them, but that doesn't mean office parks can't be found within the metro. I am not sure I would connect those two things together.

Seattle is more of an international city then Portland is and have positioned themselves to be much more attractive to companies that want that.

Our problem with attracting business is no different that Philly's when compared to NYC. Unless you are suggesting a Boeing size company, then that I am not sure we have enough room within our UGB to handle such a large facility other than up by the airport.