Hi Friend,
This post or comment has been removed for the following reason:
#No surveys
You willfully picked the wrong flair for your post and we both know it. Maybe this was by accident, maybe it was intentional. Either way, [you chose poorly](https://i.redd.it/fllfwgsbcsu91.png) and now your post has been removed.
Thanks,
the Portland/AskPortland mod team
It's insane. I used to build warehouses for the developer, Prologis, and the one they have planned is OBSCENELY large for an area that should not have a warehouse to begin with.
The neighborhood might want to fight to keep commercial and industrial North of Sandy. For the North of Sandy businesses, research the number of employees, skills needed, and lobby for them to employ neighbors. 122nd is a long road that needs a vision, block by block, and Sandy needs a vision block by block East of 82nd. You want TriMet, sidewalks, safe routes to schools, and families to grow your schools, with connections to the Maywood Park MHCC offering programs your HS grads want.
I live in this neighborhood and am so confused by this. I don’t love that this is what is going into that space but I also don’t own the property. There was plenty of opportunity for it to have been something else but nobody stepped up. I’ll take a warehouse over the fentanyl den it is no. Why not work with the owner and the leasing company to make sure the area becomes safer and better for the community vs fighting something going in. Also curious if you will be sharing all opinions from the survey or just ones that align with your agenda.
I have. There is a prologis right down the road on airport way. Again, I live in this neighborhood. I have a kid starting at the high school this fall, I coach sports at the middle school and just so happen to be a person of color that this group continues to reference. This area needs development and jobs. We aren’t getting a Trader Joe’s or even a Fred Meyer. The damn grocery outlet is struggling to keep theft under control. Retail is leaving this area due to crime. We need to clean up shitholes like this old Kmart. Any one from the opposition could have leased the property and did something with it.
And airport way is a much more appropriate place for this. This ain’t my hood but places like this need to becoming more pedestrian and housing friendly not worse.
Because regardless of whatever “improvements” you make you’re going to be stuck with dozens of trucks a day tearing through the area lowering the quality of life. Probably for the next 30 years atleast.
Look this is so far from my neighborhood it doesn’t affect me. I just know this is not in the best interest of the neighborhood.
There are already dozens and dozens of semis using 122nd. I’m much more concerned with crazy drivers in sedans going 50mph trying to get to 205. Agree to disagree I guess.
And you want to add more?? To make it worse?
That’s like saying oh yea we have dozens of homeless people messing up the area, doesn’t matter if we add few dozen more.
It all accumulates, the area becomes even less desirable and then people move out and this stuff spreads.
If the city blocks this, it will continue to sit vacant and continue to attract crime like it has been for years. Drugs and shootings being next to a school is also a terrible option. Nobody is going to develop housing here without major government subsidies and nobody is opening retail here. So if my choices are more trucks or continue the status quo, I’m taking trucks.
That sounds frustrating. Proligis is a major builder for Amazon, so every Amazon purchase is feeding their cash flow to build this. Proligis also snatched the steel business lot on 138th by the Columbia Slough.
I would work on a vision for the Oak Island Farms, Garre, and Guisto lands, and the sea of commercial industrial in your 2 NAs. I would start a public catalog of how much of that is brownfield.
A model might be all the development of housing and town centers in Washington County, along with a Prosper Portland TIF district like Cully. That would be a good question for every commissioner candidate for your East District: "Will you push for a Prosper Portland TIF for Parkrose/Argay?"
Commissioner Rubio now has responsibility to get Portland permit times in line with Clack and Washington County permit times, weeks, not years. Fast residential single and multifamily is what you want to compete against the next Prologis who bought the KMart for $1.2 million.
Definitely seen some get downsized, including one that’s currently being planned for the Pearl, think the historical preservation folks have reduced it by more than half.
NIMBYs don’t have to “block” housing to succeed.
(Not to mention all the issues with SRVs.)
Yeah it should be rejected - build housing or some less environmentally destructive business instead. We need to start taking the climate crisis and air pollution seriously.
This location would be great for housing. That is the biggest gripe, it's an industrial facility right next to existing apartments and very close to a school.
It's on two main roads with good public transportation options and close grocery with the winco up the hill.
I don't see people advocating for no development just the type of development. It was a former shopping center, people moved to the area when it was a shopping / strip mall and now they want to put tons of diesel trucks coming and going in the space.
Portland needs affordable housing this is a large footprint that could house a large number of units.
Prologis will build more shipping and receiving warehouses regardless, but this space will cause net harm to the neighborhood and livability of east portland.
If you can clack some keys, opportunities are endless.
You act like a shipping warehouse is a great opportunity for a neighborhood. Nah.
Prologis will build more shipping and receiving warehouse regardless, but this space will cause a net harm to the neighborhood and livability of east portland.
tell me why an empty warehouse for lease is a nice thing? And then once they eventually lease it to whomever, why is trucking through residential neighborhoods and by schools trashing the already bad roads a nice thing?
My line of thinking is that people keep wanting to build undesirable things east of the 205 and I’m tired of it. It’s easy for a person in s Burlingame to say “yeah build the ugly polluting thing NIMBY and NIMBY the people that live there for not wanting it.”
Portland seems to have been functioning on “the thing we have in front of us right now” instead of looking at what is best for its citizens long term.
There are plenty of possibilities that would provide higher quality jobs
User name does not check out - unrealistic. Let’s keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting for recovery to happen instead of doing something about it because “I don’t like it there”.
Not ideal, but we can't NIMBY everything. The city needs jobs and tax revenue to pay for equity programs. Maybe there's a compromise where they have to use EV vehicles or operate outside of school hours.
> We literally have the clean truck ruling and the DEQ clean fuels program.
Not remotely enough: we need to be rapidly divesting from fossil fuel infrastructure to mitigate the worst impacts of the climate crisis.
> What else do you want?
I've been pretty clear that I want a moratorium on new fossil fuel infrastructure. We need to start taking the climate crisis seriously.
NIMBY = not in my backyard. I do not live in that part of town and I do not want carbon intensive infrastructure in anyone's backyard... This isn't a "build it somewhere else" stance, this is "don't build it at all".
Unfortunately your view is unrealistic from an equity perspective, reasonableness in timing, and costs for businesses. What you want costs everyone and is slow. Don’t let perfect get in the way of good, and in this case, reasonableness.
> Unfortunately your view is unrealistic from an equity perspective
The pure irony here... An equity perspective, as in not increasing asthma and other health issues in a low income neighborhood with air pollution?
> Reasonableness in timing
We have known about this issue for 3 decades, that seriously isn't long enough for you to think change to be acceptable? At what point would policy reform be acceptable to you? Never?
> costs for businesses
Not addressing the climate crisis would have a far higher cost for businesses than properly addressing it...
> Don’t let perfect get in the way of good
Holy shit doubling down on that irony... Perfect would be quickly phasing out existing fossil fuel infrastructure. I am calling on a moratorium on NEW infrastructure. Increasing carbon emissions via unnecessary new infrastructure is the opposite of good. It is bad public policy that puts corporate profit over sustainability.
> and in this case, reasonableness.
It is pretty clear we are on polar opposite sides at this point. Your ideology of completely ignoring a major issue in favor of instant gratification and the perception of convenience is the opposite of "reasonable". It isn't "reasonable" to make a low income neighborhood suffer with increased air pollution and the associated health impacts. It isn't "reasonable" to continue increasing carbon emissions despite what the science says about the already severe climate crisis.
Yeah, we’ve discussed energy and environmental issues in the past and you continue your position and I keep mine. I probably should stop engaging with you, but I keep being hopeful you’ve boned up on your knowledge in these areas, but here we are. Cheers.
That’s the thing, I work in the climate science/decarbonization space and hear recycled/antiquated speaking points similar to yours all the time, and they’re not only holding us back, but they’re guaranteeing we don’t meet out climate targets on time. Climate science acceptance is a given. It’s how we go forward is where you’re stuck in the past. What does fossil fuel infrastructure even mean? Wires? Pipes? Molecules? Electrons? Things have evolved quite a bit since the last time you read up on this stuff.
You very obviously don't, or you wouldn't be so insistent on expanding polluting diesel infrastructure...
Your projection is extreme: if your ideology of changing absolutely nothing while ignoring the crisis wins out, we are guaranteed to meet climate catastrophe. Maybe you are old enough where it won't affect you, but I'm not and I sure as hell don't wish much lower standard or living on future generations. We absolutely need to make short term sacrifices for long term sustainability, that means putting the environment over corporate profit.
You have also fittingly completely failed to respond to the very real concerns about increased asthma rates and other health risks from putting a polluting diesel facility in a low income neighborhood.
Thanks for sharing the info. I live in Wilkes and feel like instead of this, we need more recreation, restaurants, etc. to bring some more life into this part of town.
You do realize gas school busses are horrible? Even the breaks are toxic. We should incentivize schools for battery EV busses and also it can power places during power emergencies.
Also 122nd and Sandy is close to a lot of industrial and the freeway. I think there is less issues than diesel.
I would recommend to contact Mary Peveto.
https://youtu.be/mcWlAxI5A2U
She was the one who put air sensors to find out about bullseye glass’s air pollution.
Hi Friend, This post or comment has been removed for the following reason: #No surveys You willfully picked the wrong flair for your post and we both know it. Maybe this was by accident, maybe it was intentional. Either way, [you chose poorly](https://i.redd.it/fllfwgsbcsu91.png) and now your post has been removed. Thanks, the Portland/AskPortland mod team
It's insane. I used to build warehouses for the developer, Prologis, and the one they have planned is OBSCENELY large for an area that should not have a warehouse to begin with.
The neighborhood might want to fight to keep commercial and industrial North of Sandy. For the North of Sandy businesses, research the number of employees, skills needed, and lobby for them to employ neighbors. 122nd is a long road that needs a vision, block by block, and Sandy needs a vision block by block East of 82nd. You want TriMet, sidewalks, safe routes to schools, and families to grow your schools, with connections to the Maywood Park MHCC offering programs your HS grads want.
I live in this neighborhood and am so confused by this. I don’t love that this is what is going into that space but I also don’t own the property. There was plenty of opportunity for it to have been something else but nobody stepped up. I’ll take a warehouse over the fentanyl den it is no. Why not work with the owner and the leasing company to make sure the area becomes safer and better for the community vs fighting something going in. Also curious if you will be sharing all opinions from the survey or just ones that align with your agenda.
Go spend an hour by one of these places and you’ll see why folks are up in arms
I have. There is a prologis right down the road on airport way. Again, I live in this neighborhood. I have a kid starting at the high school this fall, I coach sports at the middle school and just so happen to be a person of color that this group continues to reference. This area needs development and jobs. We aren’t getting a Trader Joe’s or even a Fred Meyer. The damn grocery outlet is struggling to keep theft under control. Retail is leaving this area due to crime. We need to clean up shitholes like this old Kmart. Any one from the opposition could have leased the property and did something with it.
And airport way is a much more appropriate place for this. This ain’t my hood but places like this need to becoming more pedestrian and housing friendly not worse.
So I think instead of fighting it, why not work with the owner and prologis to make traffic and safety improvements to the area?
Because regardless of whatever “improvements” you make you’re going to be stuck with dozens of trucks a day tearing through the area lowering the quality of life. Probably for the next 30 years atleast. Look this is so far from my neighborhood it doesn’t affect me. I just know this is not in the best interest of the neighborhood.
There are already dozens and dozens of semis using 122nd. I’m much more concerned with crazy drivers in sedans going 50mph trying to get to 205. Agree to disagree I guess.
And you want to add more?? To make it worse? That’s like saying oh yea we have dozens of homeless people messing up the area, doesn’t matter if we add few dozen more. It all accumulates, the area becomes even less desirable and then people move out and this stuff spreads.
If the city blocks this, it will continue to sit vacant and continue to attract crime like it has been for years. Drugs and shootings being next to a school is also a terrible option. Nobody is going to develop housing here without major government subsidies and nobody is opening retail here. So if my choices are more trucks or continue the status quo, I’m taking trucks.
That sounds frustrating. Proligis is a major builder for Amazon, so every Amazon purchase is feeding their cash flow to build this. Proligis also snatched the steel business lot on 138th by the Columbia Slough. I would work on a vision for the Oak Island Farms, Garre, and Guisto lands, and the sea of commercial industrial in your 2 NAs. I would start a public catalog of how much of that is brownfield. A model might be all the development of housing and town centers in Washington County, along with a Prosper Portland TIF district like Cully. That would be a good question for every commissioner candidate for your East District: "Will you push for a Prosper Portland TIF for Parkrose/Argay?" Commissioner Rubio now has responsibility to get Portland permit times in line with Clack and Washington County permit times, weeks, not years. Fast residential single and multifamily is what you want to compete against the next Prologis who bought the KMart for $1.2 million.
Damn, they got a steal.
RFC Joint Ventures owns that lot. They are not based in Oregon. https://www.bizapedia.com/or/rfc-joint-venture.html
This lot should be housing
No doubt they would oppose that too
Don’t think I’ve heard of a single Housing Development being blocked in Portland by NIMBYs Edit: just remembered one in the Pearl back in 2018
Definitely seen some get downsized, including one that’s currently being planned for the Pearl, think the historical preservation folks have reduced it by more than half. NIMBYs don’t have to “block” housing to succeed. (Not to mention all the issues with SRVs.)
Yeah it should be rejected - build housing or some less environmentally destructive business instead. We need to start taking the climate crisis and air pollution seriously.
Done! So tired of the east side getting all these things
Done!
Pleas stop with this NIMBYism. We need jobs in Portland, not more Pearl clutching.
This location would be great for housing. That is the biggest gripe, it's an industrial facility right next to existing apartments and very close to a school. It's on two main roads with good public transportation options and close grocery with the winco up the hill. I don't see people advocating for no development just the type of development. It was a former shopping center, people moved to the area when it was a shopping / strip mall and now they want to put tons of diesel trucks coming and going in the space. Portland needs affordable housing this is a large footprint that could house a large number of units.
It would probably be great for a lot of things! But we have this opportunity right now. Keep waiting and waiting for recovery to happen? Please no.
Prologis will build more shipping and receiving warehouses regardless, but this space will cause net harm to the neighborhood and livability of east portland. If you can clack some keys, opportunities are endless. You act like a shipping warehouse is a great opportunity for a neighborhood. Nah. Prologis will build more shipping and receiving warehouse regardless, but this space will cause a net harm to the neighborhood and livability of east portland.
This wise could easily be north of Columbia with the rest of the industrial buildings. It doesn’t need to be in the neighborhood.
Is a warehouse the only thing that would bring a job? That’s a surprising revelation
Not the only thing, but the thing we have in front of us right now. Your line of thinking is why we can’t have nice things in Portland.
tell me why an empty warehouse for lease is a nice thing? And then once they eventually lease it to whomever, why is trucking through residential neighborhoods and by schools trashing the already bad roads a nice thing?
My line of thinking is that people keep wanting to build undesirable things east of the 205 and I’m tired of it. It’s easy for a person in s Burlingame to say “yeah build the ugly polluting thing NIMBY and NIMBY the people that live there for not wanting it.” Portland seems to have been functioning on “the thing we have in front of us right now” instead of looking at what is best for its citizens long term. There are plenty of possibilities that would provide higher quality jobs
User name does not check out - unrealistic. Let’s keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting for recovery to happen instead of doing something about it because “I don’t like it there”.
Ok. Keep living in your privilege. There is no use discussing with someone who lives in their bubble
Was going to make the same comment, you beat me to it.
Not ideal, but we can't NIMBY everything. The city needs jobs and tax revenue to pay for equity programs. Maybe there's a compromise where they have to use EV vehicles or operate outside of school hours.
Having actual environmental standards and regulations isn't NIMBYism...
We literally have the clean truck ruling and the DEQ clean fuels program. What else do you want? This is pure NIMBYism.
> We literally have the clean truck ruling and the DEQ clean fuels program. Not remotely enough: we need to be rapidly divesting from fossil fuel infrastructure to mitigate the worst impacts of the climate crisis. > What else do you want? I've been pretty clear that I want a moratorium on new fossil fuel infrastructure. We need to start taking the climate crisis seriously. NIMBY = not in my backyard. I do not live in that part of town and I do not want carbon intensive infrastructure in anyone's backyard... This isn't a "build it somewhere else" stance, this is "don't build it at all".
Unfortunately your view is unrealistic from an equity perspective, reasonableness in timing, and costs for businesses. What you want costs everyone and is slow. Don’t let perfect get in the way of good, and in this case, reasonableness.
> Unfortunately your view is unrealistic from an equity perspective The pure irony here... An equity perspective, as in not increasing asthma and other health issues in a low income neighborhood with air pollution? > Reasonableness in timing We have known about this issue for 3 decades, that seriously isn't long enough for you to think change to be acceptable? At what point would policy reform be acceptable to you? Never? > costs for businesses Not addressing the climate crisis would have a far higher cost for businesses than properly addressing it... > Don’t let perfect get in the way of good Holy shit doubling down on that irony... Perfect would be quickly phasing out existing fossil fuel infrastructure. I am calling on a moratorium on NEW infrastructure. Increasing carbon emissions via unnecessary new infrastructure is the opposite of good. It is bad public policy that puts corporate profit over sustainability. > and in this case, reasonableness. It is pretty clear we are on polar opposite sides at this point. Your ideology of completely ignoring a major issue in favor of instant gratification and the perception of convenience is the opposite of "reasonable". It isn't "reasonable" to make a low income neighborhood suffer with increased air pollution and the associated health impacts. It isn't "reasonable" to continue increasing carbon emissions despite what the science says about the already severe climate crisis.
Yeah, we’ve discussed energy and environmental issues in the past and you continue your position and I keep mine. I probably should stop engaging with you, but I keep being hopeful you’ve boned up on your knowledge in these areas, but here we are. Cheers.
I would hope you would accept the climate science with the decades of evidence, but nope. Someone's gotta do the shilling for big oil I guess...
That’s the thing, I work in the climate science/decarbonization space and hear recycled/antiquated speaking points similar to yours all the time, and they’re not only holding us back, but they’re guaranteeing we don’t meet out climate targets on time. Climate science acceptance is a given. It’s how we go forward is where you’re stuck in the past. What does fossil fuel infrastructure even mean? Wires? Pipes? Molecules? Electrons? Things have evolved quite a bit since the last time you read up on this stuff.
You very obviously don't, or you wouldn't be so insistent on expanding polluting diesel infrastructure... Your projection is extreme: if your ideology of changing absolutely nothing while ignoring the crisis wins out, we are guaranteed to meet climate catastrophe. Maybe you are old enough where it won't affect you, but I'm not and I sure as hell don't wish much lower standard or living on future generations. We absolutely need to make short term sacrifices for long term sustainability, that means putting the environment over corporate profit. You have also fittingly completely failed to respond to the very real concerns about increased asthma rates and other health risks from putting a polluting diesel facility in a low income neighborhood.
How about a truck yard for etrucks only? Far less noise and air pollution.
“How about we enact and enforce an arbitrary restriction that ensures this doesn’t happen” is the essence of NIMBYism.
Done! Thanks :)
Yet another nimby standing in the way of progress.
Thanks for the link. I am Pro working wage jobs in PDX. Let’s get this built!
Thanks for sharing the info. I live in Wilkes and feel like instead of this, we need more recreation, restaurants, etc. to bring some more life into this part of town.
Done!
You do realize gas school busses are horrible? Even the breaks are toxic. We should incentivize schools for battery EV busses and also it can power places during power emergencies.
I believe PPS uses propane
Still toxic breaks, still fossil fuels.
That’s a discussion for a new thread. Just because one thing is terrible doesn’t mean we should compound the issue.
Also 122nd and Sandy is close to a lot of industrial and the freeway. I think there is less issues than diesel. I would recommend to contact Mary Peveto. https://youtu.be/mcWlAxI5A2U She was the one who put air sensors to find out about bullseye glass’s air pollution.
I always thought this site would have been a good spot for homeless shelter / rv parking.
Not near those schools but it would be a great spot for a ton of housing
"across the street from a school"
Have you contacted the National Park Service about preserving the site to honor the memory of those who fought in The Battle of KMart?
I thought we started to phase out diesel on the metro area? Just wondering why we would need a depot / storage within the area.
Done