DEBUNKING PORTLAND: THE CITY THAT DOESN'T WORK

August 24, 2007

Though many people consider Portland, Ore., a model of 21st-century urban planning, the region's integrated land-use and transportation plans have greatly reduced the area's livability. To halt urban sprawl and reduce people's dependence on the automobile, Portland's plans use an urban-growth boundary to greatly increase the area's population density, spend most of the region's transportation funds on various rail transit projects, and promote construction of scores of high-density, mixed-use developments, says Randal O'Toole, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute.

When judged by the results rather than the intentions, the costs of Portland's planning far outweigh the benefits, explains O'Toole:

  • Planners made housing unaffordable to force more people to live in multifamily housing or in homes on tiny lots.
  • They allowed congestion to increase to near-gridlock levels to force more people to ride the region's expensive rail transit lines.
  • They diverted billions of dollars of taxes from schools, fire, public health, and other essential services to subsidize the construction of transit and high-density housing projects.

Those high costs have not produced the utopia planners promised.

  • Far from curbing sprawl, high housing prices led tens of thousands of families to move to Vancouver, Washington, and other cities outside the region's authority.
  • Far from reducing driving, rail transit has actually reduced the share of travel using transit from what it was in 1980.
  • And developers have found that so-called transit-oriented developments only work when they include plenty of parking.

These problems are all the predictable result of a process that gives a few people enormous power over an entire urban area.  Portland should dismantle its planning programs, and other cities that want to maintain their livability would do well to study Portland as an example of how not to plan, says O'Toole.

Source: Randal O'Toole, "Debunking Portland: The City That Doesn't Work," Cato Institute, Policy Analysis No. 596, July 9, 2007.

For text:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8463

 

Browse more articles on Tax and Spending Issues