[sustran] New Urbanism, Portland and THE ECONOMIST (fwd)

Eric Bruun ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu
Tue Jan 20 03:20:16 JST 1998



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 14:03:12 +0000
From: John Pucher <pucher at erebus.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: pucher at rci.rutgers.edu
To: Eric Bruun <ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu>
Subject: Re: [sustran] New Urbanism, Portland and THE ECONOMIST

Eric,

With a total population size only about a tenth of LA, how could you 
possibly expect the Portland density to equal that of LA anyway.  The 
crucial error Cox makes is that he totally fails to control for city 
size.  One should compare Portland with other cities of comparable 
size, or the comparison is quite simply unfair.

John Pucher

Feel free to pass this on if appropriate.


Date:          Mon, 19 Jan 1998 10:15:25 -0500 (EST)
From:          Eric Bruun <ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu>
To:            sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
Cc:            notice at il.net, vuchic at seas.upenn.edu, pucher at rci.rutgers.edu,
               garrity at teleport.com
Subject:       Re: [sustran] New Urbanism, Portland and THE ECONOMIST


The Census data up to 1990 that Cox cites below is very obsolete. The
infill craze, and there really is some infill going on, is over the last
few years. However, it is still limited and is causing a lot of hardship
for people of modest means as real estate values approach those of 
San Francisco. Cox is right that the average density is lower
than Los Angeles, as LA does have some dense areas.  However, I think the
data will show that Portland is increasing in density, and not decreasing
like almost every other city. Eric Bruun


On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, Wendell Cox wrote:

> Article in current issue of THE ECONOMIST suggests that Portland's 2 decade
> old urban growth boundary had forced infilling development. US Census Bureau
> data for the 1980-1990 period indicates no such trend (latest data
> available). Among 10 US urbanized areas with  more than 1 million
> population, Portland ranked last in percentage density increase. Ranked 7th
> in overall density --- barely half that of Los Angeles.
> 
> Details at...
> 
> http://www.publicpurpose.com/dm-uargn.htm
> 
> Best regards,
> Wendell Cox
> WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
> International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning
> The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
> http://www.publicpurpose.com
> Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
> P.O. Box 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA
> 
> "To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
> identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
> that is no higher than necessary."
> 
> 


***************************************
John Pucher
Department of Urban Planning
Rutgers University, Bloustein School
33 Livingston Avenue, Suite 302
New Brunswick, New Jersey   08901--1900
Fax:  732-932-2253
Phone:  732-932-3822, ext. 722
email: pucher at rci.rutgers.edu
***************************************



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list