EX-BLAZERS' HOME COURT: PORTLAND

Almost like you can't generalize about people, and each one is an entity deserving of their own opinions and respect?

 

Link?

 

I thought Scottie Pippen had a house in Portland as well? Rasheed? Damon?

 

Scottie sold his. He lived next door to a friend of mine. Massive place.

 

Well duh. Portland is a quarter the size of Seattle and an 8th the size of LA. Those cities stretch out 3 times as far so it will take 3 times as long to get around

Per capita is not like a per 36. Its a real stat based on population. If you have 1 million people trying to drive on 1000 miles of road, that is different than 100,000 trying to drive on the same amount of road.
Or better yet, whats a better situation? 100 cars on the road at once with 25 miles to drive on one road, or 1000 cars on the road with 250 miles to drive on one road?

Per capita is an absolute valid stat for traffic.

Plus the article that I linked(which based on your response I can only assume you didn't open) has us ranked 7th worst, two spots better than Seattle. So why are we trying to even bring their traffic up? Me saying it sucks here is valid and it does. I'm sure some places might be worse... well 6 of them to be exact.....

 

Per capita traffic? What's that? Those cities have worse traffic precisely because they have more people.

I lived in Seattle before I moved to Portland. Both cities have grown considerably in the time I've been here, but Seattle rush hour traffic was worse 28 years ago than Portland's is today. Seattle has no urban growth boundary and poor planning that has led to horrible sprawl. The average lot size up there is much bigger than it is in Portland, and while that sounds nice at first, it creates a transportation nightmare in a large urban area. With everyone so spread out, you can't effectively address your traffic problem through the use of efficient public transportation. Throw in the bottlenecks caused by all the large bodies of water that commuters have to either drive across or around and traffic is an absolute nightmare. Beautiful city, but traffic flat out sucks.

And don't get me started on parking in downtown Seattle...

When we lived in Seattle, we were in the 'burbs and my wife worked in downtown Seattle. On a good day, her commute was 45 minutes each way (on a bad day, an hour and 15 minutes each way). When we moved to Portland, we also lived in the 'burbs and she worked in downtown Portland. On a bad day, her commute was 20 minutes. Of course, being in the 'burbs in Portland means you are physically closer to downtown, but that's the point. In Seattle, everything is so spread out, going into the city from the suburbs is a major undertaking (be sure you have a full tank of gas and the kids have used the restroom). Part of that is geography, but a large part of it is poor urban planning.

About six years after we moved here, we had an opportunity to move back to Seattle (we both had job offers up there). One weekend visit was all it took to convince us it would be a move backwards. Traffic was horrible, and at the time, the cost of a house in the Seattle area was about 50% more than a comparable house in Portland. The difference in housing costs isn't as great as it was then, and Portland traffic has gotten worse than it was 20 years ago, but it's not like Seattle traffic has gotten any better.

I will probably move someplace warm and sunny when I retire, but as far as a place to live from my mid-20s through my mid-50s, and a place to raise my kids, I can't think of a better place than Portland, OR.

BNM

 

Most of them probably wifey'd up local girls or settled down. It's terrible if you are single and wealthy.

 

OKay, so you guys do understand that not all cities have the same amount of roads and square mileage within the borders right?

So cities that have more people living within the same space than a city with less people in the same space would mean worst traffic right?
My point is the city limits of Portland is dwarfed by the size of Seattle and LA metro. The amount of people per square mile is much more in both of those cities. There are less people per square mile in Portland. Like ALOT less, yet we are right behind those cities in traffic. Does that make more sense?

 

I was typing my response when you posted this. It's not just about population. It's about housing density and urban planning. Portland was at the forefront of the New Urban Planning movement. Seattle was a joke. They let the developers do whatever they wanted. That's what led to ridiculous, out of control, urban sprawl, which has made traffic a mess and efficient public transportation all but impossible.

BNM

 

Exactly.
I think I explained it better in my next post.

Per capita based on the city limit square mileage.

 

You got that exactly backwards. Greater housing density makes traffic better, not worse, in a large urban area. It is urban sprawl in places like LA and Seattle that makes their traffic so heinous. With greater housing density, people, in general, live closer to where they work, closer to where they shop and closer to where they recreate. All that means less miles traveled to where they want to be, and less time spent in their cars clogging up the limited space on the freeways. I don't even live in the city, but I can walk, or ride my bike to work, to the grocery store, to the bank, to the post office, etc. I don't have to even get in my car to go to 90% of the places I need/want to be. Try that in LA or Seattle some time.

Portland, and I'm not just talking the city proper, I'm including the entire Portland metropolitan area, is much more compact than Seattle or LA, because we have had an urban growth boundary and thoughtful urban planning going all the way back to 1970. It is the sprawling suburbs in Seattle and LA that has made traffic in those areas so bad.

BNM

 

I think what's much more telling, when it comes to traffic, isn't the population density in the inner city, I think it's the average commute distance. When you have urban sprawl, the distance from the suburbs into the city increases, that makes commutes longer and traffic worse. Seattle is exceptionally bad, because the city proper is sandwiched between two very large bodies of water, Throw in poor (or more accurately, no, urban planning) and it's a traffic nightmare.

Try commuting from Bellevue into downtown Seattle and compare than to commuting from Beaverton into downtown Portland and you'll see what I mean. From Bellevue into downtown Seattle, you have two floating bridges. Sure you can go around Lake Washington, but that's usually even worse. In both cities, the major freeways will be clogged with traffic during rush hour, but in Portland, you have alternate routes and the option to ride the Max. In Seattle, unless you own a boat or a helicopter, your options are limited.

 

good points I didnt think about.

 

I do think Seattle is somewhat an unfair comparison because of all the waterways. That would be more like comparing to the bay area. but I get your point.

 

Wait though. I used to live in the Puget sound. All over south King County. Beaverton to Portland is only 7.1 miles. Bellevue to Seattle is 10.7 miles and only has one way to cross the river unless headingdown to Factoria square.

Seattle is not a good comparison because they cant build multiple through ways like LA and Portland can. Even Portland is somewhat limited because of the river and west hillside.

I still get your point

I also still think Portland traffic really sucks when it takes me on average of an hour and a half to go 29.4 miles from my work to home ever day.

 

Beyond Portland being a great place to raise a family it also has other benefits that many states don't offer:

Antonio Harvey:

Cliff Robinson:

By the way, regarding traffic - I live in L.A. (and by that I mean the area around L.A.) and whenever I visit family in the Portland area and hear people bitch about traffic I laugh. Yes traffic in Portland has gotten worse than when I was growing up, but there's just no comparison. Los Angeles is an endless sea of shit, concrete and traffic. It's a huge place and there's still way too many people in it. I really miss Oregon.

 

It's all that water combined with uncontrolled growth and poor urban planning.

Average age also plays a role in commute times. Younger, single people are more likely to rent an apartment close to where they work and/or like to hang out. Once people get a little older, want to buy a house, have a family, etc. they tend to move to the suburbs where the schools are better and they will have a yard for their kids to play in. That means they tend to have longer commute distances and, of course, longer commute times. In some cases, the Bay Area especially, and more recently Seattle, that leads to what are called super commuters that live over 50 miles from where they work as they can't afford a decent family house closer to the city.

There are many variables that figure into urban planning. It's more than just traffic and public transportation. It's smart zoning laws that allow people to live closer to where they work. If you're really interested in this topic, I recommend Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream, by Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. I was really into the whole quality of life thing back when our kids were little. We looked into relocating, but after reading that book and weighing our options, decided to stay right here in Portland.

Due to the work or people like Duany and Plater-Zyberk (and others), Portland is kind of a mecca for the whole New Urbanism movement. We attended a weeding in Toledo, OH three years ago and stayed at a really nice bead & breakfast is a truly horrible part of town (basically, all of Toledo fits that description). The B&B was owned by a couple that served as our hosts. The husband also served on the city council and when he heard I was from Portland, all he wanted to talk about was urban planning and how he attended a conference on the subject in Portland every year.

All things considered, it really is a nice place to live. People here (for the most part) actually care and want to keep it that way.

BNM

 

Yeah, sorry. Meant metro because most commuters don't actually live in the city limits.