2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I think any discussion of South Waterfront liveability needs to include a discussion of the dog ownership issue. The neighborhood caters to dog owners; there is a very high density of dog owners in an area of relatively little open space and grass. We have a young daughter, and have lived in the neighborhood for about a year and a half. We were so excited at the prospect of the park opening, and that has been really positive. However, the park, as well as every bit of open space around the neighborhood, is pretty much covered in dog poop. We basically feel like the neighborhood has chosen dog rights over family liveability. 

posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context