Brickbats

Brickbat: Rest Easy

|

Some members of the Portland, Oregon, Planning and Sustainability Commission say they are concerned by changes the commission has made to the city's design guidelines. The new language says the the design of developments should "provide opportunities to rest and be welcome." Commission member Jeff Bachrach said this will have an impact on private property owners. "I think for us to put into design review some loaded words that suggest we want some design commissioners to think about people resting for hours, pitching tents, I think we're just putting too great of a burden on design review," he said. But commission member Oriana Magnera defended the new language. "Just one of the realities of Portland right now is that we have a lot of folks who are unhoused who benefit from some of these spaces that provide weather protection," she said.

NEXT: Will the Fed Edge Out the Competition With Real-Time Payments?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Property owners will also be liable for anything that happens to the people “resting” on that property, I assume.

    1. Well, duh. You can’t go around building an attractive nuisance and expect to avoid getting sued.

      But the increase in business will more than outweigh the added expenses, so not to worry.

    2. They should at least provide them food and access to a restroom.

      1. Ban door locks?

  2. Put them in a domed coliseum and televise them doing battle to pay for it.

    1. Two bums unhoused individuals enter, one bum unhoused individual leaves.

      1. And then later the other one leaves, after being declared the winner

      2. They’re not “bums”, you bigot. They’re “urban outdoor-enthusiasts”, yeesh.

    2. I’d pay-per-view that. Besides, we all know nothing bad ever happens when government forces the poorest and weakest among us to take shelter in a (New Orleans Super)dome.

  3. I can’t say I’m shedding many tears for Portlanders – you wanted to live in a community and you’re surprised there’s communists running the commune?

    And that’s true of most cities – if you’re going to be living cheek-to-jowl like pigs in a crate, you’re going to have to get along with the other pigs. That means rules, lots and lots of rules to keep from annoying the neighbors. And if the neighbors are militant vegan atheist genderfluid anti-Trump environmentalists, everything you do including breathing is going to annoy them.

    1. And those rules need to extend to the suburbs and rural regions, because if you need a million rules to get by, then damn it, you’re going to make them do it too.

      1. You guys have just summed up the entire administrative state; I’ve jest read two books by Mike Lee and you pretty much said everything in a few paragraphs.

  4. So why don’t they just say it: there is no private property, we just want you to pay taxes on it.

    1. You didn’t build that.

    2. I’d argue that there is no private property. There is merely property that one can secure a lifetime lease on through the the government with certain privileges. If I truly owned my property, I wouldn’t need permission to build nor would I need to continually pay the state to keep the state from taking it from me.

  5. Well that’s just silly. Now if the business owners were Christians and the homeless bums were faggots it would be another thing.

    1. It’s Portlandia, so the business owners and bums pretty much have the exact opposite labelling as what you’ve described.

    2. Mmm, pork faggots and gravy.

  6. Have the members of the Planning and Sustainability Commission no basements in which to house the homeless? This reminds me of the story of the Good Samaritan who left the victim bleeding by the roadside while he hurried into town to demand the Romans prod the villagers at spear point to aid the victim.

  7. This story reminds me of when I was doing address canvassing quality control for the Census Bureau 10 years ago, going door to door in the Bronx, and had to duck under an awning for a while when a hailstorm came. Think that’s the sort of thing they have in mind? Planning for places to have overhangs people can stand under to get out of storms?

  8. I contribute nothing to society!

    And I vote!

    1. I don’t mind if you don’t “contribute to society”.

      I care that you don’t steal, assault, or murder. And by that I also include using taxation.

  9. “…commission member Oriana Magnera defended the new language.”

    Dollars to donuts she will be the least impacted.

  10. “Just one of the realities of Portland right now is that we have a lot of folks who are unhoused who benefit from some of these spaces that provide weather protection,” she said.

    That’s always the progression isn’t it.

    1. Deny the problem.
    2. Acknowledge the problem, but claim it isn’t as bad as everyone says.
    3. Tell everyone to suck it up, because this is the just the way things are now.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.