toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
How do you see a connection between Syrian refugee camps and the situation in Portland?
You've detailed before the conceptual distinction between shelter and permanent villages and the need for shelter.
How do you think outdoor shelters are being shoved aside in this instance?
Wanting to understand what you've written further,
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 7:36 PM Peter Finley Fry <peter@...
I understand the frustration driven by crisis.
The City is not one perfect and focused entity. It is composed of us and we need to take responsibility for it. The Planning Bureau’s work was evolutionary and updated our “TREATY” – THE ZONING CODE. This is what is used to enable us
to live together. An alternative is the 720 acre approximately 65,000 person refugee village in Syria that is self governed by the strong and loud. This is resulting in the death of women and children.
I know it seems that it can not happen here.
We live together by a rule of common law. Our institutions are evolving to address the very different situations that faces us as people are fleeing to our land.
The evolution is occurring both in the area of human settlement patterns as evidenced by the emerging concepts of communal living – the village. Not a new concept.
And in the institutions that help people who require assistance for what ever personal reason. The outdoor shelter system allows a way to bring people together to aid those who are suffering. This is not a all the same as a village system
of permanent habitation.
These two efforts are being confused.
My concern is that this new outdoor shelter system to provide for the poor and weak is being shoved aside by the agendas of others.
Again, I appreciate how valuable this forum is and thank you for creating and maintaining it.
Peter Finley Fry AICP PhD MUP
Land Use Planning
303 NW Uptown Terrace; Unit 1B
Portland, Oregon 97210
Mail for Windows 10
In my opinion Commissioners Ryan and Meieran are working thoughtfully and willfully to encourage development of alternative shelters. Both have accelerated and deepened the resources available for these endeavors.
Agape Village and now Beacon Village continue to evolve without government leadership. I hope our local foundations and private donors will embrace these current efforts and support development of more projects that bring together diverse
groups of housed and unhoused Portlanders. After all, it takes a village.
Please let me know if you’d like to get involved.
Founder, Executive Director
A spreadsheet published Friday by Ryan's office breaks down the 71 potential [city owned] village properties the City has identified, location, size, utility hookups, access to public transit, parking access, etc:
"Here Are Where the City’s New Houseless Villages May Be Located." by Alex Zielinski.
I'm glad the city has finally produced this list publically. I think they might have done it years ago, as suggested to them, without the several years of intervening, possibly partly diversionary, activity on Shelter to Housing Continuum
to revise entire city code to hypothetically guide this for every lot citywide. Everyone knew all along that the key need was a list of most-likely 100+ sites, not revising all city code for 100,000s of mostly irrelevant lots.
Also, I'd note that the actions so far by City and Dan Ryan's office do not appear to offer support for 'village' aka "Outdoor Shelters" (note: oxymoron) sites developed independently or on non-city land. The "Safe Rest Villages" ordinance
creates a concept of and focus solely on City-determined, City-owned sites.
The city still has not, and doesn't appear to have any intent to, release the long-requested citywide lot-level map showing eligible sites for Outdoor Shelters under recently passed S2HC. As many people have articulated, such mapping and
inventorying is a crucial resource for involving the community broadly in this effort, allowing a healthy diversity of responses, and achieving response on the scale of need. (which is far larger than the six "Safe Rest Villages" contemplated by the City).
For example, Portland developer/philanthropist Homer Williams, and his organization Harbor of Hope, have worked extensively to propose a broder city-wide network of shelter villages under their leadership: see
Also, more fundamentally, the City's approach here illustrates its relentless reduction of 'village' concepts to temporary shelters, operated by behavioral-health providers. In my view, and discussion of it in Village Buildings book draft,
it represents a political recuperation of and conservative reaction against, Portland's former leadership in envisioning & developing resident-governed, long-term, alternative 'village' housing.
[note to all: you can reply to full PDX Shelter Forum group by doing Reply to All to this email. We invite open discussion between officials and staff, publics, and especially, those closest to homelessness].
Co-founder, Critical Diversity Solutions
Thanks for your message!