URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY GETS A BAD RAP

Your article “Rent—the Rise” (WW, April 2, 2008) describes recent increases in Portland housing rents. In a long list of reasons cited by writer Jason Moore is this canard: “…an urban growth boundary that limits development.” Wrong. The Portland region’s urban growth boundary doesn’t “limit development”; it directs where development goes. It doesn’t slow the rate of population or job growth, or reduce the supply of land for housing. It’s designed to have a 20-year supply of land for development within it—hardly a “limit.”

Want proof the UGB isn’t “limiting growth”? Drive through the empty hills of Damascus, where Metro added 10,000 acres to the boundary six years ago. Or to the 800 acres of Washington County farmland near PCC Rock Creek that also came in back then. Nothing’s happening on all that vacant land because expanding an urban growth boundary doesn’t build sewers, streets, and all the other infrastructure needed for development. In the hot homebuilding market that just ended, developers were content to build in already-serviced areas—like the City of Portland—rather than front the cash needed to turn vacant land on the edge of town into neighborhoods.

So the UGB has encouraged development on land zoned for housing where we taxpayers have already invested in transit, parks, schools and the other amenities of a great community. New neighbors in existing neighborhoods mean more bikes on the Hawthorne rather than cars on the Sunset; less greenhouse gas from tailpipes; and a countryside uncluttered by sprawl.

Bob Stacey
Executive Director
1000 Friends of Oregon

TRANSPARENCY NOW

In this new age where transparency has entered in many aspects of health care, I applaud Dr. Turner for bringing this issue to light on the national platform [“Bitter Pill,” WW, April 2, 2008].

Being able to find all the clinical study results for a drug is a huge step in the right direction. Hopefully in time it won’t be hidden or buried on the FDA’s website. Maybe it will actually be shared by the drug makers so that both consumers and healthcare professionals can make well-informed decisions using all of the information available, not just what is chosen for people to know (wishful thinking). This type of transparency is now being used by many healthcare institutions. Providing the data, both good and bad, should be the standard for any organization providing health care. Hopefully more healthcare professionals will follow Dr. Turner’s lead for their own and their patients’ sake.

“Crystal Clear”
Via wweek.com