I agree with the first letter
here for the most part, that basically density requirements around transit stations make much more sense in Seattle than in Sumner and I’m not really sure density requirements around Sounder stations make sense at all. Sumner, for example, has 8,500 people in 6.7 square miles. That’s less than two people per acre net density. Even if you get a net density of 10 in the half-mile radius around the station there, you add 5,000 people to that city, more than 50% of its current population. Does anyone believe that all of those people would take one of the eight daily Sounder runs? Thankfully that requirement got striped out of HB 1490, it really only made sense in Seattle where zoning was that high anyway.
The second letter there is good for a laugh.
I think my coverage of the stimulus has been much better than Mike Lindblom‘s, if I do say so myself, and I don’t mean that as a complement to myself. That Times piece is nothing more than paraphrasal of the PSRC’s press release. No wonder the Times is running out of money and the P-I is ceasing print production.