Big development comes to Yesler Terrace

After 68 years, the nation's first racially integrated public housing community faces enormous change. So what will happen to the people who live there?

Martin Reyes. (Sally Tonkin)

Martin Reyes. (Sally Tonkin)

A Yesler Terrace girl with camera. (Sally Tonkin)

A Yesler Terrace girl with camera. (Sally Tonkin)

Bill of Yesler Terrace. (Sally Tonkin)

Bill of Yesler Terrace. (Sally Tonkin)

In Seattle, a city of distinct neighborhoods, Yesler Terrace is almost forgotten.

Just south of Harborview Medical Center, Yesler Terrace overlooks downtown, Elliott Bay, and the Olympics. It's a public housing community of 1,500 people who live in two-story apartments on 30 acres.

Sixty-eight years ago, a man named Jesse Epstein made Yesler Terrace a celebrated symbol of liberal values. It was the nation's first racially integrated public housing.

Today, Yesler Terrace is a test of those values. The agency founded by Epstein, the Seattle Housing Authority (SHA), wants to redevelop the site and make it a blend of incomes as well as races, much like High Point, the SHA's award-winning new re-development in West Seattle. The issue is a tricky balance of city politics, economics, and competing interests. An advisory group led by former Mayor Norm Rice will give "guiding principles" to SHA's board on Dec. 6. Construction would begin in 2010 at the earliest.

To some, there may be no dilemma at all. That's prime acreage, centrally located, with million-dollar views. Move out the poor, sell the land to the "highest and best use," and use the proceeds to fund replacement housing for the poor at cheaper locations and for other SHA programs. That argument is fueled by the erosion of federal support for subsidized housing.

But at least some Yesler residents and community advocates argue that every resident displaced by re-development should be provided a home, not elsewhere but back on site. SHA says it embraces that goal but wants flexibility to provide housing in the nearby community, if not exactly within the original footprint.

"Our mission isn't to hang on to dirt," says Virginia Felton, SHA's director of communications. "It's to house people. So the issue at Yesler is how can we replace the community and take advantage of the value of the asset and still respect the integrity of that community."

Says John Fox, coordinator of the Seattle Displacement Coalition, an advocacy group: "They're licking their chops to do high-end development."

I've driven through the neighborhood hundreds of times, driving on Yesler Street, which bisects the community. I once visited the old gym, which was shockingly dilapidated, perhaps the worst in the city. (It's since been replaced by a handsome community center.) I also learned my parents lived there shortly after World War II, and my eldest brother was born there. Among other past residents: former Gov. Gary Locke.

In 2005, when I ran for City Council, I doorbelled the neighborhood and met many residents, some longtimers, even one second-generation resident whose mother lived with her, and others recently arrived from Asia and Africa. The largest populations come from Somalia and Vietnam. SHA puts out documents in nine languages.

Intrigued, I started a project with my wife, photographer Sally Tonkin, to go back and document the community, not as a definitive record but as a beginning. Frankly, one of our goals was to help make sure the residents aren't overlooked. The work was supported by a grant from the city's Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs. (The exhibition opens with a reception Wednesday, Nov. 28, at 6 p.m. at Yesler Community Center, 917 East Yesler Way. Through Dec. 27.)

Yesler Terrace is not only a policy problem but a neighborhood for people like Martin Reyes, 74, who says he's been there longer than anyone else. Reyes arrived with his mother and seven siblings in 1947. A gang of whites used to harass his family and break windows until about the time Reyes became state champion in boxing in a very lightweight division. (He's 5-5 and then weighed 97 pounds.)

Reyes has worked in different jobs, longest at the county juvenile detention center. He's volunteered at the nearby St. Francis House for the homeless for 34 years. Today, he lives on a fixed income as a retiree and has no desire to move but assumes he will within five years, never to return. Despite assurances from SHA, he figures the property on the hill is just too valuable to set aside sufficient space for residents to return. "We call it the billion-dollar hill," he says. "Not million. Billion."

It's like he's living on a gold mine, only it's not his.


About the Author

O. Casey Corr is a Seattle writer who has worked for The Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. He now is employed at Seattle University as director of strategic communications. You can e-mail him at casey.corr@crosscut.com.

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 9:04 a.m. Inappropriate

Why bother?: Bulldoze all the poor people out when you scrape the land down to build mansions for millionaires. We've already accepted the fact that poor people have no right to live, let alone live on property with a VIEW!!! "Highest and best use of the land." Yeah, who gets to decide what the highest and best use is? I thought God already did that when he made it a forest, but nevermind.

Money always wins out. Haven't you learned that yet? In this country, common sense, decency, moral values are out the door; most everybody bows down to gold and kisses the asses of the rich. Sure, poor people neither deserve or know how to appreciate the finer things...let's keep those poor people where we can watch them and where not one single second can be wasted on contemplating a sunset.

You talk about housing for the poor as though they were a herd of cattle, as though depriving them of a home means nothing - move them off that valuable land and shove them anywhere, as long as it doesn't have a view.

Seattle - there is no more Seattle. It is plastic, tasteless, emotionless, meaningless. It glitters, it expands, it barely breathes. I hurt for my once-upon-a-time home and remember her well. The generation beating her down now - to paraphrase a quote - "knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."
llambo

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 9:20 a.m. Inappropriate

good idea: The current housing is important. But replacement elsewhere on First Hill or the Gatzert Elementary area would be fine. This would allow it to be just as transit-friendly, walkable, and convenient to services as living there now.

Actually, going a little outside the boundaries would make life easier for many of the residents. Otherwise, any reconstruction would mean a net loss of units until the new ones were complete.

You'd build some replacement housing just outside the current site in townhouse or apartment format (townhouses would need to go east). Phase II could be additional replacement housing within the YT perimeter, or some of the for-profit development. Since the low-income housing would be partially funded by bringing in the other development, you'd want to maximize that "income" by letting the developer(s) be successful.

SHA has done a great job providing low-income housing while integrating people of different income levels and integrating the old cut-off neighborhoods into their surroundings. The good architecture is helpful. One other misc benefit is that a mixed-income neighborhood will attract retail that a low-income neighborhood won't.
mhays

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 9:23 a.m. Inappropriate

RE: Why bother?: You do realize that the housing would be replaced? That in fact it needs to be replaced or totally remodeled? And that the money to do this will come in part from doing a "Holly Park" type redevelopment?

Also, "mansions" would never happen there. The land is too valuable. Probably condos and maybe even commercial or medical uses.
mhays

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 9:47 a.m. Inappropriate

History of displacement and the architecture: >Preservation Seattle ran a great backgrounder on Yesler Terrace in January 2004 (a software glitch is preventing me from providing a link, but you can find it at historicseattle.org) that looked at its place in history, what it has meant in the life of the city and its design. The history of displacement is fascinating--the story reports that a flourishing Japanese community was removed to make room for it. The homes and buildings have been much altered over the years, but they were cutting-edge modern design in their time. They were inspired by Swedish worker housing and prominent architects such as Victor Steinbrueck were involved in the project. I think Casey makes a great point in his story that in considering its future, it's very important not to forget the people. I also think the Preservation Seattle article reminds us that it's also important not to forget the past--that Yesler Terrace has been a vibrant, controversial, sometimes troubled neighborhood that is an expression of local politics, idealism, and callousness, all of which are alive and well today.

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 11:23 a.m. Inappropriate

More Yesler specificity, please: This article leaves out so many specific nuggets of necessary information. Of the supposedly 1500 residents, how many are under 18 and where do they all go to school?? What is the sliding monthly rent spectrum from lowest to highest $$ amount?? How many subleases are there and what about 'boyfriends, unnamed tenants, guests, hanger-oners', etc. Is there a deferred maintenance backlog of xxx millions?? What known developers are already drooling over the 30 acres?? Let's have some follow-up.

animalal

Posted Tue, Nov 27, 2:23 p.m. Inappropriate

commons and preservation: To make a big generalization, the neoliberal economic blueprint for the last 3 decades has been to privitize many public assets while socializing the costs of private interests. From the savings and loan bailout to Enron this has seemed to be the case.

I do not claim to know the whole story about Yesler Terrace. As a classic representative of a housing type of a particular era, it is probably landmark worthy. As low-income housing within the City core, it likely addresses an important need that will not be met with dispersing those people to other areas of the region.

The supposed driver is that the feds are not ponying up, so we need to get funds by privatizing government assets. I'm not sure if this is a reason or an excuse but it does seem to fit the trend.

We've heard a lot from private propert rights activists but they do not seem as concerned when about the property rights of the commons - those things that we hold as shared resources for our society, when they are sold off they are gone forever. Private property rights are endangered when the boundaries of public property are not respected.

Posted Wed, Nov 28, 4:50 a.m. Inappropriate

RE: Why bother?: Millionaires? That's a laugh. Even if they built mansions on that site, no one who could afford a million dollar home would ever want to live there. At best, you'd see some townhouses for 300 or 400K, which is what similar properties are going for in the area. I agree we need to provide affordable living to the poor, but the kind of development being proposed provides housing affordable to the middle class, who are every bit as important to the fabric of this city.

If Seattle is hurting you so much, there is an abundance of rundown, economically stagnated cities in this country where you won't encounter those glittery successful people who don't know the value of anything - Detroit, Cleveland, St Louis, Gary, Newark, Fresno, Albequerque, Baltimore, just to name a few. You might also seek some professional help getting over your bitterness at other people's good fortune.
Sean

Posted Wed, Nov 28, 11:06 a.m. Inappropriate

correction: As Gilda Radner once said, Never Mind. Well, not quite. My previous comment was based on the mistaken impression that Jefferson Tower next to Harborview was going to be demolished.

But I would be curious to know where some of that low-income housing will be relocated and how near the city core it will be. There are some dangers inherent in the partial privitization of that low-income housing land.

Posted Wed, Nov 28, 4:45 p.m. Inappropriate

LOW DENSITY: 50 persons per acre is a suburban density; the kind of density you might find at Snoqualmie Ridge. It was a fine project but it's economically and functionally obsolete.

kieth

Posted Thu, Nov 29, 1:42 p.m. Inappropriate

RE: History of displacement and the architecture: Knute, if you ever find that link in Preservation Seattle please post it. I did a search on the article but no luck. I think we're going to see a lot of press on Yesler Terrace in the next few months, so the background will be useful. I expect architects will be competing for the design contract sometime early next year.

Thanks,

Joshua M
JM

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »