Washington County (Beaverton, Hillsboro, Tigard, Forest Grove, etc.)

[aquaticko]

Originally Posted by subterranean

My census tract is denser than all but 4 in Portland outside of downtown and is set to get much denser yet. It is the literal definition of a TOD neighborhood. It has room for improvement but it is just a matter of time. Your east coast neighborhoods were built before cars. There is no comparison. As you go outward from those densest tracts, the NE sprawls more than just about anywhere. Beaverton, Aloha, and Hillsboro are densifying more than most places in the country, so if you hate it here (you sure like to complain) you’re going to find it worse a lot of other places, except for perhaps your beloved northeast, which maybe you should consider going back to.

I'm well aware of all this. I've actually stuck in the same junky apartment building because I love its location in central Beaverton so much: a 10-minute walk to the library and the Beaverton Central MAX station, 15-20-minute walk to either Winco or the Fred Meyer next to 217, easy access to work by transit. It's a dream, even if the concrete balcony that I use to access my apartment is quite literally crumbling, there's next to no sound insulation, and I've on more than one occasion seen people doing meth/fentanyl in the parking lot in front. To say nothing of the noise from cars/trucks along OR 8, the freight train passing by at all hours of the day and night....An equivalent apartment in a similar neighborhood in my Greater Boston hometown would cost me literal hundreds of dollars more, and the politics in New Hampshire are about as dysfunctional as Oregon's.

What I've come to realize about the way so many suburban towns around Portland are built is that it's the worst of both worlds: no one has the kind of large, almost rural-feeling yards that far-out New England suburban towns offer, in neighborhoods bereft of stroads designed (if not signed) for 50mph traffic , and yet a truly urban experience--with quiet, narrow streets which people naturally do not feel comfortable driving quickly/erratically on--is almost non-existent, save for a few neighborhoods in downtown Portland.

Nonetheless, I stay here because this place is closest to my ideal that I could reasonably afford, and I push for it to be better because downtown Beaverton (and Portland) is so good in so many ways. I'd have less right to complain about things if I lived in some further-flung suburb where I have even less reason to expect it to be good; I'm in Beaverton because it already is so good, and yet as Portland's closest-in westside suburb, it should be better.

The overarching point is that it shouldn't be so difficult to find a cheap apartment where one can potentially live car-free, and focusing on making it easier to live what is essentially a more luxurious lifestyle--car-dependent with free-flowing traffic everywhere, bigger apartment or even single-family home--is exactly the wrong end of the problem to work on. We shouldn't be wasting so much as a press release on how we're going to improve vehicular flow through an interchange, not when true housing affordability and freedom from car dependency is out of reach of so many.

[subterranean]

Fair enough.

I think I get defensive of Beaverton because it’s like the easy Portland whipping boy and gets it from all angles. The most annoying is the old guard of Portland urbanists who do nothing but shit on Beaverton nonstop despite good people doing good work here to make it better. It will literally never be good enough for them because it’s Beaverton. They still view it as a suburban wasteland with a suburban mindset, which just isn’t true. Yes, there is sprawl here, yes there is too much parking, but it is no worse than outer southeast and certainly a lot better than SW Portland. People also live here because their jobs are out here, not just because it’s a bedroom community for Portland and contributing to traffic. Many of us chose to live here specifically because we didn’t want to commute. Last I checked, there were nearly as many Portlanders driving to Nike and Intel et al. as there were suburban commuters going into the city.

And just like outer southeast, Beaverton/Aloha is where people were pushed when they couldn’t afford Portland, yet people just think of Bethany and Cooper Mountain when it’s much more diverse here than that, both in form and demographics. Beaverton now is not Beaverton of the 90s.

[aquaticko]

As someone with no real stake in any Beaverton vs. Portland animus, I'd say it's all dumb. It's all dumb when people from New Hampshire pretends they "don't need" Boston--as if more than 1/3 of all the people living in the state would be there if Boston wasn't. It's dumb when just about anyone outside of a national/global hub has any notable pride in where they are, and even then, the real point of pride to get from being in such a place should be the realization that "it's different here" is never meaningfully true, at the biggest scales or in the broadest sense. Every village/town/city throughout history has been full of people who are--99% of them or more--just trying to get some joy out of life. People shitting on one place because it's "secondary" to another is always dumb, but especially when talking about places like Portland and Beaverton.

I harp on Portland's weaknesses because, as the region's central city, it should be even denser with residents and businesses to actually serve as the regional anchor that anywhere needs. I think probably the most essential lesson of economic geography from the last 150 years is the importance of having at least one area in a region that is extremely efficient with public/private resources; Metro Portland doesn't really have that. Portland leads within the region on that metric, but not by enough to survive much scrutiny if you're impartial about it.

I harp on Beaverton's weaknesses because it largely echoes Portland's strengths and deficiencies too closely, just at a smaller scale. It could've been--could be--an even more urbanist enclave, setting an example for the rest of the region even if it doesn't lead in terms of scale. Examples of this I have in mind are places like Cambridge or Somerville for Greater Boston, or perhaps now--with the wild recent success of its Vision Zero practices--Jersey City for NYC.

We all know that sometimes smallness can be an asset, granting speed of change even if it works against scale of change. If Portland's stagnating (which I think a lot of people fairly argue it is at least stagnating), Beaverton has an opportunity to take the lead, actually giving ped/cycling-first infrastructure the prominence I think a lot of people who aren't here ascribe to the region in ways that being here makes feel untrue.

I have no real stake in things, but wherever I am, it'd be cool to be in a city that's leading the nation in globally-good urbanism, instead of riding on the coattails of an image that's long lost any substantiality it had.

[uncommon.name]

Hillsboro’s Block 67 Deal Officially Dead…Again



According to the City of Hillsboro Website, the latest Block 67 redevelopment agreement is dead and no longer binding. The exclusive agreement that was made with Rembold Development in 2022 led to much fanfare and a lot of press about a massive new project that would stimulate the downtown Hillsboro economy and provide important housing and groceries to the area. This 2nd attempt to develop the Block was greeted with a lot of mixed feelings, but the drawings were alluring. And for those with memories of the heartbreak felt when the last big project (announced in 2017) died, this one hurts. All of the time, energy, and Millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money now buried in the ground along Baseline & Washington Street seem to be such a lost opportunity.

The City bought the land in 2016 for $4,800,000 using Hillsboro taxpayers’ money. This price was $1,317,000 dollars per acre- a huge amount by any historical standards. Havings said that the property holds huge promise and could change the fortunes and lives of the people downtown...

Read more at the Hillsboro Herald.

[aquaticko]

That article makes for a very frustrating read, though not for the reasons I think the author likely intended.

He says that maybe the plot should've been sold to the private sector, and that public ownership has impeded progress on development. I know little enough about Oregon's development laws; is TIF not an option here? He says that the city had worked with developers previously, in better economic times (not that interest rates are really that punitive now), and nothing worked out, but he scarcely says why.

It's not as though private ownership of valuable plots of land is a cure-all. E.g., those spots immediately adjacent to the Beaverton TC ought to be very valuable, but the owner keeps waiting for a sweeter offer (a better "economic time") to sell to a developer because property taxes here are (apparently) low enough that they don't discourage squatting on valuable pieces of land until the end of time.

That article feels more like an only slightly-subtle finger pointing at public ownership as the cause of the problem, rather than an honest attempt to figure out what went wrong.

[uncommon.name]

Originally Posted by aquaticko

That article makes for a very frustrating read, though not for the reasons I think the author likely intended.

He says that maybe the plot should've been sold to the private sector, and that public ownership has impeded progress on development. I know little enough about Oregon's development laws; is TIF not an option here? He says that the city had worked with developers previously, in better economic times (not that interest rates are really that punitive now), and nothing worked out, but he scarcely says why.

It's not as though private ownership of valuable plots of land is a cure-all. E.g., those spots immediately adjacent to the Beaverton TC ought to be very valuable, but the owner keeps waiting for a sweeter offer (a better "economic time") to sell to a developer because property taxes here are (apparently) low enough that they don't discourage squatting on valuable pieces of land until the end of time.

That article feels more like an only slightly-subtle finger pointing at public ownership as the cause of the problem, rather than an honest attempt to figure out what went wrong.

That's a Dirk Knudsen piece for you. 90% of what he writes in his newspaper are opinion pieces where he criticizes the City of Hillsboro and Washington County. He's very anti-developement if it involves anything other that preserving what Hillsboro was 40 years ago. You can tell by the way that he writes that his whole shtick is to "get the dirt" on something so he can break some wild story about it.

[subterranean]

Hillsboro Hops secure $8M from Washington County, but still face make-or-break moment for new ballpark


HILLSBORO, Ore. — Washington County has agreed to kick in $8 million toward a new ballpark for the minor league Hillsboro Hops, bringing the project one step closer to fulfilling its funding target ahead of what the team describes as a critical Major League Baseball deadline.

Source: https://www.kgw.com/article/sports/b...f-1a8eafd47475

[maccoinnich]

Hillsboro Hops receive $15 million from Legislature for stadium, securing team’s future in Oregon



With about a week to spare, the Oregon Legislature approved $15 million in funding for a new Hillsboro Hops stadium — narrowly avoiding the team’s potential relocation.

The House and Senate approved the legislation Thursday to help the team build a new baseball stadium for the Hops right next to Ron Tonkin Field, where the team currently plays. The Hops are a High-A affiliate, the third highest level of minor league baseball, for the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Major League Baseball had extended the Hops’ deadline to secure the funding for a new park from September 2023 to March 15, so the Hops managed to meet that requirement with only a few days to spare.

...continues at OPB.

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

...continues at OPB.

I wonder what they will do with the ball fields where the proposed stadium looks to be? Maybe they will demo the old stadium? Every time I've been there those ball fields were being actively used by youth leagues. Impressive how much activity is at that location besides the Hops games.

[babs]

Originally Posted by PhillyPDX

I wonder what they will do with the ball fields where the proposed stadium looks to be? Maybe they will demo the old stadium? Every time I've been there those ball fields were being actively used by youth leagues. Impressive how much activity is at that location besides the Hops games.

From what I understand Ron Tonkin field will be available as a regular ball field. I know there was controversy with loosing the ball fields but they were going to build additional ballfields elsewhere.

[uncommon.name]

Originally Posted by PhillyPDX

I wonder what they will do with the ball fields where the proposed stadium looks to be? Maybe they will demo the old stadium? Every time I've been there those ball fields were being actively used by youth leagues. Impressive how much activity is at that location besides the Hops games.

They are working on plans for replacing the fields. One thing to note that many articles often don't mention is that it is only a net loss of 2 fields since RTF will become useable by the public as well. They are proposing to build 2-3 new fields just NW of the new stadium on land adjasent to US-26.

From the City of Hillsboro website:
Spring 2024 Update
The Hillsboro Hops ballpark project was awarded the requested funding from the Oregon State Legislature in March 2024. The project funding gap is now closed and the project will continue to move forward.
Replacement field options are currently in the early stages of design and have reached 35%. City staff will be providing a base design, cost estimates, and additional options for the fields to the Parks & Recreation Commission(PRC) and City Council for review.
Additional public outreach and engagement on the project is planned for this spring.

Read more here...

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by uncommon.name

They are working on plans for replacing the fields. One thing to note that many articles often don't mention is that it is only a net loss of 2 fields since RTF will become useable by the public as well. They are proposing to build 2-3 new fields just NW of the new stadium on land adjasent to US-26.

From the City of Hillsboro website:
Spring 2024 Update
The Hillsboro Hops ballpark project was awarded the requested funding from the Oregon State Legislature in March 2024. The project funding gap is now closed and the project will continue to move forward.
Replacement field options are currently in the early stages of design and have reached 35%. City staff will be providing a base design, cost estimates, and additional options for the fields to the Parks & Recreation Commission(PRC) and City Council for review.
Additional public outreach and engagement on the project is planned for this spring.

Read more here...

That's good. I had to assume they would try to replace (otherwise get the outcry from sports parents). But you never know.

[subterranean]

Pi Day update. The Moderas, Beaverton and Raleigh.

[subterranean]

New REI as of today, which will be the state’s largest. It looks like they’re sprucing up the entire shopping center with new matching paint as well.



Across the street, the current phase of Ceder Hills Crossing, is also well underway. I couldn’t get pics though because I was driving home. I’ll try to get some soon.

[babs]

Originally Posted by subterranean

New REI as of today, which will be the state’s largest. It looks like they’re sprucing up the entire shopping center with new matching paint as well.



Across the street, the current phase of Ceder Hills Crossing, is also well underway. I couldn’t get pics though because I was driving home. I’ll try to get some soon.

Wish REI could have gone into a more distinctive space. The inside and nearly vacant part of Cedar Hills Crossing could have been repurposed for REI. A missed opportunity.

[subterranean]

Nearly vacant? The place is stuffed to the gills and it’s a nightmare getting in and out of there now, both sides of Jenkins, and they’re not even done building. I just wish the MAX ran closer to it.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Nearly vacant? The place is stuffed to the gills and it’s a nightmare getting in and out of there now, both sides of Jenkins, and they’re not even done building. I just wish the MAX ran closer to it.

I wish Trimet and Metro would have built several MAX lines on the Westside like they have done on the Eastside of the metro.

[subterranean]

It would be slightly better if they moved the station from Millikan to Hocken or added a new stop there. As it stands, it's 1.3 miles from Millikan to Jenkins at Cedar Hills Blvd. Very doable by transit + bike, but not conducive to walking for most people. It's a mile from Beaverton Central.

[aquaticko]

Would help, too, if Cedar Hills/Hall Blvd was less stroad-y, and the neighborhoods more permeable...or if there was more, denser housing in the area. A mile's not even that far to walk, but it's not a terribly pleasant experience when you're next to 5 lanes of traffic for most of the trip.

The low bandwidth of car-centric planning is showing itself, here.

[subterranean]

Agreed, although Hocken is damn pleasant compared to Cedar Hills Blvd.

I've said this before, but when I speak of the difficulty of walking a mile or more, I'm framing it as a big hurdle to improving transit ridership over all. People will continue to drive if they don't have readily available access to their daily needs literally at stations or within a very short walk. I don't know too many people who ride transit regularly, let alone people who drive, who are willing to hop off for some shopping and do 2 miles of walking round trip.

I also have my suspicions based on news and local discussions that the Tektronix campus will likely develop into a mixed use neighborhood in the next 10 years, at least on a portion of the property.