Seattle.gov Home Page City Services Staff Directory [WEB GRAPHIC] About Seattle.gov City Contacts
Seattle.gov Home Page
 SEARCH: 
Seattle.gov This Department
Seattle City Council
Council Home About Us Contact Us
web graphic
Council Calendar Current Issues Council Newsroom Committees & Agendas Council Live Research City Laws
Councilmember Richard Conlin Councilmember Richard Conlin
  Email: Richard Conlin Phone: (206) 684-8805 Fax: (206) 684-8587
Conlin Home
About Richard
Committees
Richard's Video Seattle Channel Webcast
In the News
Legislation Sponsored by Richard
2008 Work Program
Community Photo Gallery
Newsletter
Newsletter Archives
News Releases
Staff Bios
Council Audio Podcast

MAKING IT WORK

Seattle City Councilmember Richard Conlin

The purpose of this newsletter is to provide information, inspire involvement, and make things work in this great city. Send feedback to me at conlin@speakeasy.org. Please reference the newsletter in the subject line.

To SUBSCRIBE to MAKING IT WORK
Send a message to Majordomo@lists.speakeasy.org
In the body of the message type "subscribe makingitwork"
To unsubscribe, type "unsubscribe makingitwork" in the message

March 9, 2006, Volume VIII, Issue 2

CONTENTS


CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE

The Council has been working on amendments to Seattle’s Critical Areas Ordinance since last November, under a state requirement for review at least every ten years. On Monday, March 6, proposed revisions to this roadmap for protecting key habitats, shorelines, and wetlands came to the Council floor for a vote, but the Council postponed action until Monday, March 27, reflecting conflicts over how strong the ordinance should be.

While most of the changes are technical or relatively modest, I sponsored three important amendments which were approved by the Committee:

  1. Preventing new residential development within 25 feet of a shoreline. Under the previous legislation, there was an exception that allowed houses to be built within 25 feet of a shoreline if there were other houses within 100 feet that were built closer than 25 feet. This will no longer be permitted.
  2. Requiring parks and golf courses to keep all land within 50 feet of streams, wetlands and shoreline habitat free of pesticides and fertilizers, unless the facility receives specific permission from the Director of Seattle Public Utilities that the pesticide is critical for public safety, health or there is no other way to halt the spread of an invasive plant. This expands the buffer, which previously only applied to the most hazardous pesticides (approved in legislation I sponsored in 2004).
  3. Ensuring that the buffer for new development near salmon-bearing streams will increase from 50 feet to 75 feet.

While each of these new codes should significantly improve and protect the habitat in our city, there is one additional revision that I hope to add. My amendment sets a city policy direction in favor of daylighting streams currently buried in pipes and culverts, and empowers the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) to require that property owners and developers remove underground pipes and culverts and replace them with daylighted creeks.

The City cannot mandate this removal unless there are demonstrated benefits to fish and wildlife, and, even in those circumstances, most Councilmembers are reluctant to mandate that a property owner must be required to pay to fix an environmental problem that, in most cases, he or she did not create.

My amendment addresses this concern by allowing DPD to grant other benefits in return for daylighting creeks. For example, if a landowner is building condominiums, the DPD could reduce the required parking spaces or allow reduced setbacks in exchange for daylighting.

I am also sponsoring a resolution calling for an inventory of potential daylighting opportunities and a set of additional incentives for property owners to daylight creeks. Conceivably, the City could provide matching funds or other resources to property owners to help them remove pipes and culverts.

This legislation will be in my EEMU Committee in the future, and I will take it up again in 2007 if the legislation approved this year turns out not to adequately protect the environment.

Back to Contents

CROWN HILL PEDESTRIAN ZONE/GAS STATION

Beginning on March 20, the Council will consider three measures that affect the pedestrian character of the Crown Hill neighborhood. The Council will first consider extending the current interim pedestrian district to allow time for completion of its work on the other two measures, a permanent pedestrian district and limitations on the size of gas stations in urban villages, both of which would affect a proposed Safeway gas station in this community.

In April, 2005, the Council approved legislation I developed to create an interim pedestrian district in Crown Hill. This legislation prevents auto-oriented development that would be incompatible with the Neighborhood Plan along 15th Ave. NW, from NW 83rd to NW 87th Streets. The goal of the interim legislation was to provide time for the Council to analyze and consider a permanent mechanism to fulfill neighborhood desires to create a pedestrian urban village.

The interim district includes property owned by Safeway, which has plans to build a large gas station at the corner of NW 83rd St. and 15th Ave. NW. Neighbors fear that a gas station will generate dangerous traffic patterns and hold back land development potential in this urban village. The community asked me to develop this legislation to prevent the compromising of their vision for the future and the encroachment of car-oriented development on their pedestrian area.

The legislation creating an interim pedestrian district expires April 1, 2006. The Council is considering two alternatives that would provide protection to the neighborhood, but it is unlikely that there will be a vote on either of these before the interim district expires. For that reason, I am recommending that the Council extend the interim district for several months while we complete our work on the other legislation.

The Council will hold a public hearing on the extension of the interim district at the Council meeting on March 20, and will vote on either March 20 or 27 on whether to extend the interim pedestrian designation. The Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed permanent pedestrian district on Wednesday, March 22, at the regular meeting of the Urban Development and Planning Committee. The Committee will vote either on that day or April 12, and the Council will likely vote on the Monday following the Committee.

The Department of Planning and Development has recommended a small Crown Hill pedestrian zone that does not include the proposed gas station. I will offer an amendment to extend the boundaries of the pedestrian district to create a more realistic pedestrian zone.

The Committee will also vote later in April on legislation affecting neighborhood business districts which will include a measure limiting the size of gas stations in certain neighborhood zones. The Committee has already agreed to my amendment that limits these stations to four pump areas (serving no more than 8 cars at a time), along with other measures that would reduce traffic congestion. The amendment allows a 5th pump station only if it is dedicated to alternative fuels.

While I believe that expanding the pedestrian zone is the most appropriate step, if this measure is unsuccessful, the limitation on the size of the station will still have a positive effect in Crown Hill by reducing the impact of Safeway's proposed gas station on the community.

Back to Contents

ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT

On Wednesday, March 8, the Washington State Legislature approved a major transportation package, which included provisions delegating to the Seattle City Council the task of recommending a preferred alternative for the Alaskan Way Viaduct/Seawall Replacement Project. While the Council has had the opportunity to make a recommendation in the past, it has never had recognized authority for this decision.

The Washington Department of Transportation has the legal responsibility for a final decision on the preferred alternative, although in practice the City is a participant in the project, and it would be nearly impossible for WSDOT to proceed without City concurrence. I initiated a Council process for reviewing the alternatives in 2004 and secured the agreement of the Mayor’s Office to work in cooperation with us. As recently as last week, however, documents were being circulated naming the Mayor as the source of the City’s position.

The new legislation gives the Council the opportunity to submit the choice of alternative to the voters on an advisory ballot this November, and to hold public hearings and make a choice by ordinance. While the legislation is silent on the legal standing of this action, it seems unlikely that the state would attempt to proceed with a project alternative that had been rejected by the voters and/or Council.

In 2004, the Council voted 7 to 1 to endorse the tunnel alternative. The Council also adopted a resolution, which I sponsored, calling for a Safety and Transition Plan to implement transportation improvements that would prepare us for both an emergency closure of the viaduct and for its closure when the replacement project begins, and calling for a financial plan for the tunnel project.

Since that action, the tunnel alternative has gone through several changes in design, the issues relating to financing have become clearer, and at least one Councilmember has withdrawn his support for the tunnel alternative.

Over the next several months, I will urge the Council to develop a clear and coherent presentation of the costs and benefits of the alternatives and make sure that this is communicated to Seattle voters. I will support placing at least three alternatives on the November ballot – the tunnel, the aerial rebuild, and the distributed traffic alternative suggested by the People’s Waterfront Coalition, so that Seattle voters will have the opportunity to express their preference among the range of potentially feasible options. I am confident that the voters will make a thoughtful and deliberative choice if presented with full information about the long-range implications of the choices before them.

Back to Contents

KEY ARENA AND SONICS

The Legislature has decided not to take up in 2006 a proposal by the Seattle Sonics/Storm to extend the taxes used to build Safeco and Qwest Fields to overhaul and expand the Key Arena. I expect that the City and the basketball team will try to negotiate a proposal that could return to the legislature in 2007. Unfortunately, the Sonics/Storm appear to be committed to having the public fund this project at a level and scale that may greatly exceed the benefits to the public, and it is not clear that this negotiation will be successful.

The Sonics/Storm are an important part of the Seattle sports scene, and I regret that they have made threats to leave Seattle if they do not get their way on the Key Arena renovations. Key Arena was renovated to the Sonics specifications in 1995, and performed well until 2001. Since then, for reasons on which the interested parties do not agree, the Arena has not delivered the expected revenues, and the City has had to pay millions of dollars out of the General Fund to cover the debt service on the improvements.

The Sonics have proposed a package of some $220 million in modifications to the Key Arena that they argue are necessary. They propose that the taxpayers fund these improvements and turn over the management of the Key Arena to the Sonics. While some of the improvements will improve the field area and seating capacity of Key Arena, much of the proposal is designed to improve the concessions areas to create what will be in effect a shopping mall inside the Key Arena facilities.

While I certainly wish the team well, I am concerned that the taxpayers will not receive a return on their investment if this plan is implemented. I am also concerned that the effect of turning over the facility's operations and revenues to the Sonics will further erode the City's finances, and that the creation of this expanded business area will cut into the revenues of the businesses in the Uptown community around the Key Arena.

An analysis of the finances of Key Arena indicates that it can operate at a profit with concerts and other sports events without the Sonics, although under the current financial arrangement Key Arena will be more profitable with them. I am willing to discuss renovations and improvements that will improve the bottom line for the City and taxpayers, but I will not support any renovation that is not designed to provide a return on investment to the taxpayer. My impression is that there may be some modest improvements that meet this standard, but that the proposed $220 million package is likely to fail this test.

The Council is currently evaluating the City's options on the Key Arena, and will make a recommendation sometime in April as to a formal City position.

Back to Contents

QUOTE
“Megaproject development today is not a field of what has been called 'honest numbers’. It is a field where you will see one group of professionals calling the work of another not only ‘biased’ and ‘seriously flawed’ but a ‘grave embarrassment’ to the profession. And that is when things have not yet turned unfriendly…”

-- Bent Flyvbjerg, in Megaprojects and Risk

DEEP THOUGHT:
"When we know how to read our own hearts, we acquire wisdom of the hearts of others."

-- Diderot--Winston Churchill

Citizen participation and engagement are critical for maintaining democracy -- fostering it is a key task of elected officials. It's my hope that this newsletter will inform you about issues, inspire you to get involved, and that together we can make things work better in this great city. Please send me your feedback, so we can keep things lively, interesting, and useful. And please forward it along to friends who might be interested. You can get more information or send me feedback through the City Council website at http://cityofseattle.net/council/

Richard Conlin
Your Seattle City Councilmember

To subscribe to this list, send a message to: Majordomo@lists.speakeasy.org
In the body of the message, type: subscribe makingitwork
To unsubscribe, send a message to: Majordomo@lists.speakeasy.org
In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe makingitwork

Back to Contents

Back to MAKING IT WORK Newsletters


  For technical assistance click here to contact our web team
Seattle City Hall Council Home | About Us | Contact Us | News Releases | Legislation | Issues | Committees & Agenda | Calendar
Seattle City Hall

Seattle City Hall
600 4th Ave. 2nd Floor
Seattle, WA

Mailing Address:
PO Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

Phone: 206.684.8888
Fax: 206.684.8587
TTY/TDD: 206.233.0025
Listen Line: 206.684.8566

Richard Conlin Bruce Harrell Jan Drago Jean Godden Tom Rasmussen Richard J. McIver Tim Burgess Nick Licata Sally J. Clark
Seattle.gov: Services | Departments | Staff Directory | Mayor | City Council
Copyright © 1995-2008 City of Seattle Questions/Complaints | Privacy & Security Policy