Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels plan to "Vancouverize" Seattle is deemed unrealistic by the Vancouver planners he brought in to review his plan. No kidding.
Nickels thinks he can "stop urban sprawl in the region" by attracting families with children to live in downtown high-rises and building more public schools downtown. Some free business advice to the Mayor Nickels -- families with children will opt whenever possible for (a) single-family houses with yards in (b) good school districts. One of the main reasons for sprawl in the region is the collapse of the Seattle School District, driving scores of thousands of families out of Seattle's single-family neighborhoods. Fixing Seattle's existing public schools that serve a shrinking population is enough of a lost cause, let alone building new schools and convincing new families to enroll their kids in them.
Increasing downtown density might entice more childless adults who enjoy urban living to live downtown, but if the Mayor thinks enough families will sign up to make a meaningful dent in sprawl, then he's smoking crack. Yet another reason why it is time to retire Seattle's leadership. Too bad Nickels' most compelling challenger this year is Richard Lee.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 09, 2005 11:43 AM | Email ThisNickels is such an idiot. He doesn't seem to undertand anything about families.
It does not matter if they build new schools. They would have that same management. So, the would suck. But, even if they build new schools, how are they going to do that? Make the developers of Nickels' silly "urban villages" pay for them?
Schools are a big problem. Lack of affordable single family homes is another. And another big problem that nobody in politics wants to touch is that Seattle is patently unfriendly to male half of families.
Check out Nickels 5-year strategic plan to "end domestic violence." It was written by man-hating gender feminists straight out of Women Studies at UW.
The City Attorney spends 34% of its budget attacking families, turning domestic disputes into capital cases in their misguided War on the Patriarchy. Nickels' idea of "strong families" is to put the father in jail and have the mother go through the state for child support payments from him.
Meanwhile, child molestors are running free and drug addicts occupy parks.
The only marriages Seattle government is concerned about are gay marriages.
Screwed up priorities and misguided policies. Unless, of course, secretly what Seattle wants are singles only in the city, with half of them dependent on government in some way. From the look of it, that is what these bozos are after and the talk of families, children, and schools is all just a smoke screen.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 9, 2005 12:07 PMFrom the announcement: "It will be good for the environment."
Code-speak - Any damages to the "environment" will be wreaked elsewhere for everything that we consume onsite.
"For the first time, new commercial and residential buildings will routinely comply with the basic Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating system."
We've seen how that's (not) working out for several recent additions to the area.
"It will reduce traffic by locating housing within walking distance to jobs and to buses so people can commute without cars."
This way, the vehicles they buy will be purely for recreational use (probably those dastardly SUV's!).
"It will protect our heritage."
Only a liberal could contemplate tearing things up and changing things to mean preserving things!
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 9, 2005 12:13 PMAs usual, Seattle is clueless.
Posted by: dl on August 9, 2005 12:15 PMI mean, look, his policies can't be any more ridiculous than what comes out of Mayor Nipples and the Seattle Silly Council.
Meanwhile, we can all get some amusement out of watching Lee set up a blue ribbon commission to study the murder of Kurt Cobain. Lord knows what other crazy things he would do and, frankly, it would be a blast to watch. And, it would be relatively harmless compared to Nickels' desire to micromanage the most intimate details of our lives.
Thanks, dl for agreeing.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 9, 2005 12:25 PMOh Yeah, quality of life for raising kids.
I think pass on this one Mayor 2 1/2 cents.
Posted by: JCM on August 9, 2005 12:40 PMNow, let me guess. Ron Sims, Greg Nichols and all the Democrats/Socialists on the City and County Councils live in apartments.
Posted by: JC Bob on August 9, 2005 01:00 PMWhen you crowd rats, they eat their young. When you crowd lemmings, they do that mass suicide thing off the local cliffs. When you crowd chickens, they select individuals to bully and peck them to death. When you crowd people, you get more muggins, murders, and other forms of urban maxi-violence. None of these these are conducive to the healthy rearing of the young of most any species.
That aside, we live in highly uncertain times, geopolitically speaking. That alone makes urban "infilling", deeply unwise, and something that no thinking society should indulge in.
Concentrating your population into widely separated urban clusters provides potential adversaries with very economically attractive conquest opportunities. For a very modest investment, you can lob a few missiles and see your "advanced" adversary, the one that indulged in all those "smart growth" fantasies, capitulate overnight. Mutually assured destruction? Not when your adversary has weakened itself internally to the point where the "political suicide" of a counterstrike far outweighs the societal suicide of failing to launch that strike as soon as the attacker's first missle leaves its launcher.
And, what if there's not even a definable adversary nation to hit back at? A couple of Islamic "martyrs" with purloined suitcase nukes, and the wise persons in the Other Washington would have us all scraping our noses five times a day in the direction of Mecca, with our daughters removed from all opportunity.
We've been seeing worries of a bird flu pandemic recently. Where would such a pandemic see the highest casualty rate ... in our dense urban zones or out in the countryside? Should we wonder whether Osama and his buddies have a few vials of anthrax, smallpox, or 1918 flu available to use in our cities?
In any society existing in today's geopolitical climate, the greatest safety from attack by an adversarial nation lies in dispersing the populace across the available lands within iits borders.
So...
How is concentrating newcomers into high-rises along the I-5 Corridor being considered the intelligent thing to do?
Posted by: gaelwolf on August 9, 2005 01:01 PMThe city will waste a gazillion dollars on this "vision" of Mayor Nipples. Meanwhile, they will let the infrastructure of the few city neighborhoods that are hospitable to children (not families, because the entire city lives under the same anti-family laws) go into decline.
For example, Nickels' will continue with his drive to move CASA Latina from Belltown (where it belongs) and put it out in a neighborhood with families, like Mt. Baker, Madrona, or West Seattle. Not families will move into Belltown, while families will move out of the place that he puts CASA Latina.
Oh, and then they will put a halfway house full of pedophiles in one of these single family home neighborhoods, and so on.
These people are "true believers" in thier idiocitic ideas and will never cease with them.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 9, 2005 01:04 PMFirst step was to change the old dime shuttle buses to a 'free zone' - got those winos spread out all over town -- then they got the freeway park lid over the freeway and negated any posssiblity for building the second level of NEEDED freeway along I-5 >> think kids - that could have been done 30 years ago and doubled traffic capacity through Seattle -- and meanwhile the viaduct could have been torn down and rebuilt -- while the increased freeway capacity took up the increased traffic - but wait - oops -- da big a$$ planners and idea a$$holes that have far too much influence around here woulda used the increased capacity of the freeway as an excuse to tear down the viaduct and the condo march woulda been in full gear - what a G-D joke this town is - right - I said town
The thing that then destroyed the middle class social fabric and school system was the democRATS G-D school busing -- I personally knew 4-5 families that just plain moved on -- they were OUTTA here -- and have never looked back or regretted moving --
Now we have a total lunitic for a mayor that wants to turn downtown into a tenement park -- half this town is run by slum lords now -- I smell just more of the usual socialist SH-T - 'it's for the children' - 'urban renewal' - artsy craftsy - folkmusic on every corner - art galleries, gift shops - hey - I want hotdog vendor carts -- get on with it Seattle - why can't ya get sophisticated -- if ya really grow up you too can have hot roasted chestnut dealers on every corner at Christmas --
Posted by: Bill on August 9, 2005 01:05 PMWas just in VAN this past weekend. We were walking around in the West End and passed one bum asking a group of others for "cleans" (as in needles, folks). Nice.
Cities are chicken and egg problems, only with clear solutions. People won't move here and raise families here unless these conditions are met:
1. Safety
2. Good education
3. Good environment to raise kids in
Unless you have 1-3 worked out ahead of time, you'll never force a developer to sink tons of money into new housing. Why should they?
Nickels needs to run the bums out of town a la Giuliani. Then fix the schools. Only then will people move into Seattle and raise their kids.
Posted by: steve_dog on August 9, 2005 01:05 PMThey don't seem to get it that those are not cities to aspire to. Quite the opposite.
Seattle had a chance to be really different. To be a city that didn't go down the direction of beaurocratic planning commissions, etc...
Instead, this place strives for mediocrity. It wears it like a badge, like being half what you could be is the "sensitive" thing to do.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 9, 2005 01:10 PMBut seriously, I'm sure the mayor is trying his best to see that his vision of Seattle as a city of the future doesn't happen without closely following the new urbanist plan.
Posted by: Ironman on August 9, 2005 01:21 PMalso--note where the elite like Greg & Ron THEMSELVES choose to live--usually a healthy chunk of land and BIG, guarded fences; no studio in Poshville; no neighborhood kids sitting on his porch and raiding the lemonade jug in his fridge; if they live downtown you can bet they have something tucked away on the islands or a 'little something' in Vail or jackson Hole Wy where they host homeless kid functions, right?
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on August 9, 2005 01:25 PMRemember the stadiums folks -- maybe we can get 'emergency' tenement construction.
Also remember that when it comes to 'growth regulation', 'urban planning', environment - etc - the over-riding factor at shitty hall is - HOW MUCH MORE TAXES CAN WE COLLECT TO KEEP OUR PENSIONS AND FRINGES PUMPED UP
Posted by: Bill on August 9, 2005 01:28 PMWe can set up socialized medicine too , eh? -- then we can all go to Idaho for medical care.
Posted by: Bill on August 9, 2005 02:27 PMFirst, you can't stop it. Second, it is outside Seattle and has nothing to do with him.
It's the same thing as Nickels running out around the country to get cities to sign on to Kyoto. It's not an issue he can do anything about and it does not do anything but make Seattle more expensive if he forces it down our throats.
Well, anyway, at least I sleep well at night knowing no man is coming into contact with a strip dancer.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on August 9, 2005 02:31 PMThe PSRC group is the regional agent following directives from this group via HUD;
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm
Then there's the school and safety issues. Ick.
Doesn't that sound great! Forget about the facts:
Seattle Public Schools suck. Mono and lite rail systems, if built, won't take you anywhere you want to go, we've built two stadiums against the will of the voters, soon we'll pay for Key Arena improvements...it takes forever to get anywhere by car, homelessness (bums), hookers and junkies are everywhere. All the neighborhoods are turning to sh_t, and all of the elitist leaders have f_cking sh_t for brains and I sincerely hope they all go to H_ll after suffering long, torturous illnesses - soon.
Thanks to them for completely ruining a city I was born and raised in.
F_CK YOU NIPPLE AND SIMS!!!!
Sorry for the bad language.
Posted by: Jeffro on August 9, 2005 03:46 PM1) Don't get off work until 4:30 and I'm pretty sure that doesn't give me enough time to get there from the SODO district.
2) As per my earlier post, I may not be able to control my actions, if ya know what I mean.
Right-o, it's all about image.
Good to know there's a play climber on SW's concourse. To bad they'll be moving to Boeing Field. They'll probably take their monkey bars with them. Rats!
Posted by: Jeffro on August 9, 2005 04:04 PMWhen you look at the negative demographics, lack of jobs, cost of taxes, and crumbling infrastracture -- seattle is actually a dying city --
Posted by: Lew on August 9, 2005 04:20 PMThis guy has shit for brains if he thinks anyone would desire to raise their kids in an apartment. Families live in apartments when they can't afford other options. Their neighborhoods are called "ghettos".
Posted by: Peggy U on August 9, 2005 04:27 PMScary stuff. It is a dying town. Example, contrast the Gay Parade with the Torchlight Parade. One is gaining in size and popularity while the other is decreasing. When my daughter turned three, we moved to the east side and I'm glad I did before the housing went crazy. Decent schools, beautiful, safe parks, rarely any bums, and families, families, families. Trees too.
I'm of the belief that folks get a whole lot more benefit from grass between the toes, jumping off the swimming dock, riding bikes, dining on home cooked meals with the family… not gay parades, living in highrise condos, and tollerance of winos, junkies and hookers.
Maybe I'm just not sophisticated.
Posted by: Jeffro on August 9, 2005 04:39 PMI recently watched a drink vomit over himself downtown at the aquarium one early Sun morning with my daughter. What a civics lesson! (yes--clear distance of hazmat fluids)
I proceeded to tell her, in no uncertain UN-p.c. terms that he was a bum and needs to get his life in order--and there are places you can go for that if you REALLY want. "This is what you DON"T want to become, Honey, and we'll make sure you don't," I said. The stench and pitiful sight did it for her.
But Jeffro, that language outburst above was insensitive but forgiven--just take my place in the Home Training Session coming soon. You can be my "fake drug test"--attend the Training & use my name--all I want is the snazzy framed certificate of completion. :)
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on August 9, 2005 07:09 PMSo, I'm going to wander outside barefoot in the grass and watch my teen and a friend wash their horses. Politicians may be entertaining, but not as much as the suburbs on a sunny day; two wet teens, two wet horses on the lawn, a wet goat, a wet dog, and a playful little brother.
Posted by: dl on August 9, 2005 07:09 PMAnd jeffro says "rarely any bums". He has not yet gotten the tent city spirit. For shame.
Posted by: bwanafriend on August 9, 2005 08:04 PMSPRAWL = Single Family home with a yard close to schools and shopping. Home with a porch. Barbeques in the back yard. Privacy. Alternative sources of heat and energy in case of emergency (fireplace, generator, etc...)Free parking. Fruit trees, gardens....
DENSITY = Sardine style living in apartments and condominiums. Generally constructed with no alternative means for heat or cooking (no fireplaces or barbeques). At the complete mercy of chance that you will not get a noisy neighbor above, below or to the side of your unit. Parking fees in addition to rent. Condominium maintenance fees, strict by-laws, oppressive Condo-association rules....
Hmmm....Which would you choose for your family?
And what's with all this fawning over the lordly 'Vancouver Planners' as if they, and only they, know how we should order our lives? There they sit, issuing fatwas on the sort of construction to be allowed (or mandated) on land 'owned' by the peasants.
Didn't we boot England out of the country for similar high-handedness a couple hundred years ago? Is all we are allowed to revolt against nowadays confined to sexual mores and the gas tax? Sheesh indeed.
Posted by: Hank Bradley on August 9, 2005 08:44 PMSPRAWL = Sterile neighborhood with nothing to do but watch TV, take drugs, and play with guns. Each adult must own a car, burn fossil fuels to support Middle East terrorists, and battle traffic for the pleasure of shopping at Wal-Mart and dining at Appleby's.
OK, Deborah, the truth is somewhere between your picture and mine. And different people value different things. Let's try not to be smug, shall we?
Posted by: Bruce on August 9, 2005 09:27 PMYes, it takes money to make a city attractive. Fortunately, lots of people like to live in them, and they pay taxes.
Bruce...You really have to get out of the city sometime...
There is nothing *sterile* about neigborhoods.....Kids, dogs, cats, neighbors washing cars, playing ball, riding bikes...it's all very stimulating and healthy!
I've lived in single family dwellings and in apartments and condominiums! I've been a property manager for 20 condo's and managed each of their Board of Directors.... Living in a multi-family dwelling may be some esoteric fantasy of the left...but to your average person - it's oppressive! Apartments and Condo's simply bring political oppression down to your front door! Apartment management and Condo Board presidents quickly become power hungry dictators and residents become their *subjects*. I've seen this happen everytime.
When I think of apartment living - I think of the slums. I think of Section 8 transient families. I think of drug dealers in the hallways and kids growing up thinking fresh air comes from the stairwells.....If your apartment neighbor cooks something absolutey nasty..you get to smell it all night!
Apartments afford you no privacy - as your management can enter your unit on little notice and can evict you under a myriad of circumstance!
The left just loves this oppressive style of sardine living! They can control and monitor and charge you for everything you do!
Every truly *progressive* adult I know yearns for his own little house with a yard......It's the American dream!
Posted by: Deborah on August 9, 2005 11:08 PMidiots with "10,000 megawatts of sound;" my favorite? winning an "award" (actually very pricey fruit basket) simply for paying my rent on time; what the hell did THAT tell me about my "neighbors?!" you can have it--for some people, it works or it is the only option--for me? nope;
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on August 9, 2005 11:19 PMI can think of a lot of places that I might be willing to move the family to, mostly smaller towns. But I can tell you this for certain, there's would be no chance in hell that I'd ever move them to Seattle.
I work in Seattle, I have for years. I've seen the city degrade over the past decade or more. When I was younger I used to venture into Seattle for movies, shopping, see friends and dine. These days I avoid it whenever possible.
Posted by: Snake on August 9, 2005 11:46 PMBetter to house more people in already developed areas whenever we can - it reduces government spending on new infrastructure for roads, utlities, etc. - especially if people want to live downtown, as many clearly do at a pretty high price.
Seattle is getting far better, not worse. (Even suffering from the Mayor's fantasies on the Monorail and his gold plating of the Viaduct.) There are more jobs in Seattle than ever. And the population of the city is growing - in 2000 the population of the city exceeded the 1960 population for the first time in 3 decades. Seattle's highly educated and young workforce is the envy of many other places and a driving force in the state's overall economy.
Posted by: Thor on August 10, 2005 08:08 AMPopulation in 2000----Growth % last 10 years
Seattle:---563,374----9.1%
King Co:---1,737,034--15.2%
Pierce Co:-700,820----19.6%
Snohomish: 606,024 30.2%
As you can clearly see, Seattle is lagging beind in population growth. There must be a reason for this.
Posted by: JustSumGuy on August 10, 2005 08:42 AMDon't get me wrong- if you or anyone else wishes to be a dazzling young urbanite, more power to 'em. Your youthfulness makes you more capable of dodging bums in doorways and sidestepping human urine and feces on the sidewalks.
Just don't want my taxes going to this horrible idea. It seems to me that, based on the amount of housing and development that has occured throughout the region, folks have already made up their mind as to where they want to live.
Bruce writes; "Sterile neighborhood with nothing to do but watch TV, take drugs, and play with guns. Each adult must own a car, burn fossil fuels to support Middle East terrorists, and battle traffic for the pleasure of shopping at Wal-Mart and dining at Appleby's."
Keep believing this, it will keep your ilk out of our STERILE environs.