Month: February 2013

The Seattle Times has reported that the City Council has declined Vulcan’s offer of $10 million or so worth of free real-estate in South Lake Union in exchange for allowing Vulcan to build three taller towers in that neighbourhood:

Vulcan would transfer to the city 37,600 square feet of land on a block bounded by Broad and Republican streets and Dexter and Aurora avenues. The city could add that chunk to a smaller piece it owns to create almost a full block available for an array of social services and housing.

The Vulcan land, with an estimated value of $10 million to $12 million, would count as a credit toward fees Vulcan would pay to erect condo or apartment towers up to 240 feet on three lakefront blocks it owns and elsewhere in the neighborhood.

Zoning now allows 65-foot buildings on the three so-called Mercer blocks. Vulcan would pay bonus fees to go from current zoning to 160-feet, or 16 stories. Then it would need to provide extraordinary additional public benefits to reach 24 stories.

Often, we make the abstract argument that requiring shorter or smaller buildings reduces affordability, but rarely do we get something so concrete. It costs the city (and thus the tax payers) nothing to allow Vulcan to build taller buildings. In exchange for that, the city would have received something valuable, free land near Downtown Seattle for use in low-income housing. The literal choice was between 1) taller buildings and free land for low-income housing (along with higher property tax income) and 2) shorter buildings and no land for low-income housing, though possibly some cash down the line.

If as a city, we think we can get a better deal, fine, say that. But please no one say this:

Mayoral candidate Peter Steinbrueck had blasted the Block 59 proposal for “privatizing the city’s land-use code.”

Yes, we certainly wouldn’t want to set the dangerous precedent of the tax payers getting millions of dollars of land in exchange for something that costs them nothing. The article said the deal may be revived at some later date. I hope so. As a taxpayer, if the city can get materiel for important social functions for free, I think that’s a deal the city should take. And I’m going to make sure the city council knows that when I vote.

On Wednesday the 20th, STB is pleased to present an open house on the Ballard to Downtown Study funded in last year’s partnership between Sound Transit and the City of Seattle. We’ll have Sound Transit CEO Joni Earl, Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn, and staff from both governments to talk about this first step.

And let me reiterate that this is *just* the first step – it’ll take more work from us to get this past a corridor study. This study area is wide, from Ballard through SLU/Fremont and Belltown/Interbay to the heart of downtown, and it’ll come up with alternatives in both corridors at many levels of potential investment. It will open up a process for choosing one or more of those alternatives, but there isn’t funding for design and engineering, much less construction. It’ll be our job over the coming year or two to advocate for funding sources to connect these neighborhoods, and it’s important for us to understand what’s in the study – and what isn’t – so we can be effective in that advocacy.

So join us on Wednesday the 20th at Hale’s Ales in Fremont from 5:30-7pm, for an ALL AGES meetup to talk transit to Ballard!

Debates about how we ought to design our communities often get lost in the weeds fairly quickly: “build this! don’t build that! more density! less density! streetcars! none of the above! all of the above!” When we’re deep not in the weeds, we’re up at 50,000 feet, using vague adjectives like “livable,” “walkable,” or “sustainable.”  If we got the thing we’re all clamoring for, how would we even know? More importantly, what tradeoffs are we willing to make to get there?

As I watch friends start families and head for the suburbs in search of what they perceive to be cheaper housing, I wonder what it would take to make in-city living an option for more families. While there are many reasons why a family might choose to live somewhere or another, surely it’s a major civic policy failure if the only housing units available near frequent transit lines are 1BR apartments and half-million-dollar single-family houses.

The Center for Neighborhood Technology has done great work showing how suburban families end up spending on transportation most of what they’re saving on housing, but many times those costs aren’t transparent.  Suppose for a moment that we’d like housing in Seattle that’s transit-friendly, family-friendly, and affordable. What would that mean?

Here’s what I think it could mean: having a healthy supply of housing for sale or rent that meets the following criteria:

• 3 bedrooms
• A monthly payment of $1,500 or less (in either mortgage or rent)
• Served by transit on at least 15-minute headways daily

Call it 3-15-15.

Continue reading “3-15-15: Affordable, Family-Friendly, Transit-Friendly Housing”

The long process to replace new Attorney General Bob Ferguson is over. Local attorney and Democratic Party insider Rod Dembowski will represent the 1st district until the aftermath of this fall’s election.

Late last year STB polled all the 1st district candidates on transit and land use issues and found Dembowski to be a close second to Shoreline Councilman Will Hall. There’s reason to expect that Mr. Dembowski will have a positive impact on the single most important legislative body for transit issues.

In the first regular service change since the “big bang” in September, Metro is making some minor changes to eight routes, and deleting one:

• Route 42 will be deleted. To celebrate the benefits all Metro riders will collectively share from the reallocation of the resources required for this route to more effective use, STB will host a meetup on Friday; details to follow in a separate post.
• New surface alignment for tunnel routes 41, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77 and 316 when the tunnel is closed: 2nd & 4th Avenues versus 3rd Ave. Routes 101, 102, 106, 150, 216, and 218 already use this arrangement; the 255 uses 4th and 5th when the tunnel is closed.
• Route 216 will no longer serve Eastgate P&R in the afternoon peak (morning service is unaffected). Riders are directed to use alternative Routes 212, 215 or 554. This is presumably part of Metro’s grand band-aid plan for I-90 service.
• In the afternoons and evenings, Route 21 will serve its terminal loop in Roxhill both when arriving from, and departing to, downtown (currently, it only serves this loop when departing). This provides slightly more useful coverage of Arbor Heights Roxhill.
• Route 24 will gain one more trip, in each direction, in the evening. The last bus out of downtown will be about 10:15 PM, and back in from Magnolia Village about 10:10 PM. This makes Magnolia slightly less impossible to access in the evenings on transit, but the smart thing to do would have been to restructure Magnolia service along the lines originally proposed.
• The schedule for Route 55 will be slightly tweaked to provide more consistent headways. Also, one special trip, from Alaska Junction to the Admiral District at 7:31 AM will be added. I suspect this is effectively a school tripper, or useful for some other unique, yet locally popular purpose.
• Very minor changes will be made to the stops, alignments or scheduling of routes 71, 131, 152, 246, and 372.
• Westlake customer service center hours will change.
• Sound Transit 510, 511, 512 and 513 will no longer serve the stop at 6th Ave S & Atlantic St.
• Sound Transit 550, 556 and 566 will have minor schedule changes.

You can read all about it here.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

On January 31st, Bellevue held its Transit Master Plan network design workshop. You can find the agenda (including some maps) and fittingly Jarrett Walker-esque presentation slides online (his company is facilitating the process.)

As they usually do, this meeting had interesting data. Bellevue is of course the second most transit-oriented city in the region, with 12% of commute trips served by bus (vs. 18.3% for Seattle and 8.2% for third place, Issaquah).

And then there are the (unscientific) survey responses, which for both Bellevue residents and other respondents couldn’t have been more commuter-oriented:
See also the cool drawings of the future of the Eastgate area and the Spring District (slides 28 and 29). As always, there’s too much greenery but given that this is Bellevue I’ll give it a pass.

The quick and easy trip up Yesler will be a little less quick for the next few months, starting this Saturday.  Those that frequent the #27 know that construction for the First Hill Streetcar has been getting more and more involved on Yesler between 8th Ave E and 12th Ave E, and starting tomorrow this stretch of road will be closed for three weeks.  However, the buses that run on this route will continue to detour until April 4.

For more on the detour, visit SDOT’s First Hill Streetcar page.

My immediate reaction is that this concept (and it’s only a concept) has far too much greenery for a center-city location, even though this is light-years better than what’s there currently. It’s outrageous that the concept includes 16 acres of parkland (out of 30 acres on-site!), but the true affront is the lawn that seems to be in front of just about every building, annihilating the possibility of active uses on most ground floors. Contrary to what the narrator tells you (4:10), “lush plantings” are not “pedestrian-friendly,”  but the enemy of walkability.

If any of these features are result of zoning laws, the City Council should fix it immediately. In fact, actively prohibiting a lot of the features shown here would be a substantial improvement,while improving the city’s fiscal position by bringing more residents and businesses.