Great City is hosting several unique events Friday and Saturday that we really should have publicized earlier. On Friday the four finalist teams of ULI’s Gerald D. Hines Student Urban Design competition, which involved designing a TOD node around Link’s Mount Baker Station, will give their final presentations. Go here to see proposals from the four finalist teams.
Additionally on Saturday Great City is hosting three breakout sessions that will focus on the convergence of development and social equity, specifically in the context of Southeast Seattle. The full agenda is below the jump. Registration for Saturday is free but requested.
From Great Cities website:
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND INEQUALITIES IN SEATTLE
Please join Great City and a roster of fantastic organizations on Friday, April 1 and Saturday, April 2 for the Equitable Growth Dialogues, a series of probing community conversations concerning regional growth, urban development and entrenched inequalities in Southeast Seattle. Through a series of focused, frank exchanges, the Equitable Growth Dialogues are intended to help build bridges between environmentalists, urbanists and social justice advocates. We believe that now more than ever these sometimes disparate constituencies need to find a shared agenda built on common interests and values. We invite you to participate as your schedule allows. Daycare, translation and lunch will be provided on April 2.
Download our brochure Equitable Growth Brochure.
This work is generously supported by the Bullitt Foundation.
More details after the jump.
EQUITABLE GROWTH SYMPOSIUM
WHERE: Franklin High School, 3013 South Mount Baker Boulevard
WHEN: April 2, Noon – 5pmFREE REGISTRATION HERE
LUNCH & KEYNOTE ADDRESS | 12 – 1 PM
Jeff Pace from the Unity Council in Oakland, California will share some of the successes and lessons learned with the development of the Fruitvale Village, a mixed use, mixed-income, transit oriented development.
BREAKOUT SESSION 1 | 1:10 – 2:20 pm
Green Jobs and Economic Development in Southeast: Opportunity without Opportunism
- Joshua Curtis, Office of Sustainability and Environment
- Stacia Jenkins, Emerald Cities Collaborative
- Roger Valdez
- Charlie Cunniff, Office of Economic Development
Creative Inspiration: Reflections the ULI/Hines Competition and Implications for Mount Baker
- Councilmember Sally Clark
- Cathryn Vandenbrink, Artspace
- Ryan Curren, Office of Housing
- Pearl Leung, moderator
BREAKOUT SESSION 2 | 2:30 – 3:40 pm
Parks, Libraries, Community Centers, and Culture: Who Pays for the Necessities and How?
- Christopher Williams, Department of Parks and Recreation
- Wyking Garrett, UmojaFest
- Michael Siewerath, Capitol Hill Housing
- Nancy Rawles, SPLAB
- Catherine Stanford, moderator
Raising all the Boats: Infill Development, Gentrification and Quality of Life
- Councilmember Mike O’Brien, Chair Seattle Public Utilities and Neighborhoods
- Tom Tierney, Seattle Housing Authority
BREAKOUT SESSION 3 | 3:50 – 5:00 pm
Transportation Investments: Who Wins, Who Loses?
- Mayor Mike McGinn
- Councilmember Tom Rasmussen, Transportation Committee Chair
- Paulo Nunes-Ueno, Children’s Hospital
- Andrew Austin, Transportation Choices Coalition
- Lynn Domingo, LELO
- Craig Benjamin, Streets for All Seattle, moderator
Health, Crime and Growth: Inequities in Southeast Seattle
- Councilmember Tim Burgess, Chair Public Safety and Education Committee
- Lisa Quinn, Feet First
- Mariana Quarnstrom, Southeast Crime Prevention Council
- Gregory Davis, Rainier Beach Community Empowerment Coalition
Bridgette Maryman, moderator
On a side note I would like to point out once again how MIA Seattle has been when it comes to being visionary about station area planning and overlays zoning. From what I know all four of the proposals are not allowed under current zoning. Seattle leaders need to stop playing around like little kids in the sandbox and actually get serious about high density, mixed used zoning in HTC station areas.
The best TOD opportunities are already starting to slip away.
Interesting since the Seattle politicos were the ones that commanded the tortured route and that the less productive Central Link be built prior to U Link. Now the “vision” is they need to accommodate more parking near the rail stations that should have never been built because there isn’t any chance the demand will require the capacity provided by an insanely expensive light rail system. I’m just amazed that trasit promoters are oblivious to the fact that money misspent is money lost. It seems the lobbying effort has successfully promoted this as a zero sum game.
What a stunningly stupid comment.
Aside from the snarky little comment above, Bernie is pretty close to the mark.
The chances of redeveloping Lowe’s into the picture above is about as good as getting the Seattle Pilot team to rebuild their stadium on the same site.
@Mike I completely disagree about Lowes. Given the right zoning that use will no longer pencil out as the best use.
Is there actually any evidence that people in the Rainier Valley aren’t riding Link because they can’t drive to it? Are the private pay lots filling up?
@ Adam: Sure, zoning just ‘enables’ redevelopement, but capital is what drives it.
I don’t know Lowe’s ROI, but it would have to be significantly less than abandoning a current profit center in favor of selling the property to an investor group. I stand by my statement, unless you’ve got some numbers to convince me otherwise.
@Mike. Certainly Lowes would have to see it in their interest to move but I don’t think that either you or I know the answer to that question. If Lowes can move to a new location and make a profit off of it I’m sure they will.
Just like rezoning agricultural land to residential increases the value of the property over night, rezoning this land will also increase the value, making it more likely that Lowes could make a profit moving. I would also point out from a market access perspective the current store is in a pretty poor location. Something closer to I-5, I-90 or SR-99 in the SODO area would probably be preferable. This site just works because it was a large lot and was located in a historically low property value area of the city.
Also large single ownership lots, close to rail and in Seattle attract big investment firms with lots of money behind them. Even in economy like this.
Well, there are other heavy handed ways the city can MAKE Lowes move or redevelop. Obviously eminent domain is one way, but changing the land use significantly enough that will require them should they wish to put in for a significant permit for a remodel could preclude them from keeping the development as-is. That is the brilliance of zoning and development changes. Clearly, the city will want to work closely with Lowes to develop a workable plan so that it need not be so heavy handed. But, the tools are there if the community are determined to see change.
Amen, Adam. From an economic, an ecologic and a constituent way of life point-of-view, even in Seattle our elected officials are far to the left the curve. (left is the bad side btw)
Can someone please remind these design teams that Bellevue is on the other side of the lake?
I don’t see how the first one, Rainier Boulevard is very suburban.
Damn that first one is WAY out of scale.
How so?
I guess times they are a’changin’ but I don’t forsee that kind of development flying in a largely residential neighbourhood.
Possibly. And I don’t doubt some NIMBYs would protest, but this kind of development should be our goal around LINK stations, so it should at least be our starting point.
It’s interesting that the development shown isn’t “around” the Link Station. It could have been “around” the link station if link had used Rainer instead of burrowing into the hillside. Still, I’m surprised that Mount Baker isn’t the busiest station between DT and the airport given bus connections. I guess there’s lot’s more people with good paying jobs DT that live on Beacon Hill than anywhere else along the line.