Kenneth Trease
@kptrease.bsky.social
engineering manager currently taking a break, co-founder @burkebrewing.bsky.social, opinions my own. he/him. normie shitlib data science bikes housing abundance transit language kids birds beer seattle
Those are not Poohs. Those are Poos.
December 21, 2025 at 3:39 AM
Those are not Poohs. Those are Poos.
thanks for the apology. that helps.
December 19, 2025 at 7:12 AM
thanks for the apology. that helps.
I wonder whatever happened to that guy.
December 18, 2025 at 7:15 PM
I wonder whatever happened to that guy.
Hey, given the responsible and sober stewardship of our tax dollars that ST has exhibited so far, why are you so reluctant to just give them more money?
December 18, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Hey, given the responsible and sober stewardship of our tax dollars that ST has exhibited so far, why are you so reluctant to just give them more money?
Critiquing those rules is also YIMBY and it's absolutely needed.
There are people who are convinceable on density, but do not want to live in a townhouse that is a compromise with a bunch of rules designed to prevent density.
Let's give them some better options!
There are people who are convinceable on density, but do not want to live in a townhouse that is a compromise with a bunch of rules designed to prevent density.
Let's give them some better options!
December 17, 2025 at 9:03 PM
Critiquing those rules is also YIMBY and it's absolutely needed.
There are people who are convinceable on density, but do not want to live in a townhouse that is a compromise with a bunch of rules designed to prevent density.
Let's give them some better options!
There are people who are convinceable on density, but do not want to live in a townhouse that is a compromise with a bunch of rules designed to prevent density.
Let's give them some better options!
Or rules that demand an off street parking spot for each unit. Or the pavement to access it.
We could get just as many housing units, for less money, and more enjoyment of that housing, by changing some of those dumb rules.
We could get just as many housing units, for less money, and more enjoyment of that housing, by changing some of those dumb rules.
December 17, 2025 at 9:02 PM
Or rules that demand an off street parking spot for each unit. Or the pavement to access it.
We could get just as many housing units, for less money, and more enjoyment of that housing, by changing some of those dumb rules.
We could get just as many housing units, for less money, and more enjoyment of that housing, by changing some of those dumb rules.
I think the complaint of the OP was about a critique of a townhouse complex in portland. More housing is good! Regardless of form, it's better than less housing.
But we don't need rules that make a huge percent of floor space be stairs. Or rules that demand a tiny private yard for each unit.
But we don't need rules that make a huge percent of floor space be stairs. Or rules that demand a tiny private yard for each unit.
December 17, 2025 at 9:01 PM
I think the complaint of the OP was about a critique of a townhouse complex in portland. More housing is good! Regardless of form, it's better than less housing.
But we don't need rules that make a huge percent of floor space be stairs. Or rules that demand a tiny private yard for each unit.
But we don't need rules that make a huge percent of floor space be stairs. Or rules that demand a tiny private yard for each unit.