Time to toss the Council out and elect people who protect the interests of the citizens, and not the real estate cabal.

Still avoiding the obvious...if given a "most votes wins" oportunity the voters would choose to replace or refurbish the viaduct over a tunnel or surface option. That's the reason for this race to knock it down before there is any opportunity for an honest review.

Still time to do the right thing.

As is common among anti-tunnel folk this article ignores Seattle's role as a transportation hub. The Port and its thousands of containers, the shipyards and factories and fishing fleets all require a ground transportation system to make them work. It's not just about zoning and density. We could have the density of Hong Kong and have all commuters on bikes but if we didn't have a way to move products and supplies through Seattle there's no economic vitality to the city. Our unique geographic footprint funnels all this transportation through a central downtown bottleneck of high priced real estate. Sorry, but bridges and tunnels will always need to be part of Seattle's future as long as we are an international port that values local blue collar factory jobs.

"The city is obsolete; ask the computer." Marshal McLuhan, 1969

The deep bore tunnel displaces tens of thousands of cars to surface streets through Queen Anne, Lake Union and Denny Triangle; tens of thousands of cars to Pioneer Square and Alaskan Way, and tens of thousands more in avoiding the toll.

All studies show the latest, last and curiously best design for a Cut/cover Tunnel in the DEIS displaces the LEAST traffic onto surface streets and could be built after the surface/transit option which immediately offers needed fixes for I-5, needed transit upgrades, and takes the vulnerable AWV down soonest.

Wsdot and their conservative cronies in Big Business offer the worst AWV replacement option to a misinformed public as their best.

I'm with you on density Roger. Of course.

The lack of projects at Beacon Hill and other TOD locations is mostly Sound Transit choosing to wait before they sell or ground lease their properties, coupled with the economy. Seattle's low zoning is factor in what gets built, but the bigger factor is the duration and uncertainty of our entitlements process. To make a project work you have to think of it years in advance, and pay a large percentage of the project cost through design etc. long before you decide to actually build it or acquire funding. That's a big bet, and worse, you have no idea what the economy will be like when the building opens. Cities with shorter, more predictable processes allow developers to be more nimble. All of that is a big factor in housing affordability.

RevSandy is right, but I will take the critique even further. The fact is that over 30% of our tax revenue comes from our manufacturing and industrial sector. And yes, as RevSandy points out, our transportation system moves products and supplies through our region. That means we need to think of our streets, bridges, tunnels, highways, as connectors between the "node" or hub that is Seattle and all other places. That means places as in your local Costco, Freddy Meyers, or Trader Joes. It also means places like Chicago, as 70% of the Port's cargo is pass-through to some other place.

But beyond that, the City Council and especially the Mayor seem to have a peculiar myopia about dealing with economic vitality issues at all. They seem to be almost disconnected to the issues of well-paying jobs, workforce development, assistance to small business, export assistance, or possible opportunities for public-private partnerships. They seem to take for granted that our up-and-coming clusters like multimedia/graphics, specialty foods, tourism, and others will simply grow and prosper without help. The truth is, that in today's economy, if you're not dancing as fast as you can, you lose out to another region. That means knitting together concerns about transportation, land use, and economic development.

The PSRC is updating its regional economic strategy. That's part of the picture. But they are a policy advising body, not a policy making body. We pay our local elected leaders to make policy. They should do so, and do so in a way that uses land and transportation to grown and ensure our economy, especially our manufacturing and industrial economy.
Tom B.

Seattle is not exactly in density stasis as a cursory review of data and a visual inspection of neighborhood change indicates. Since 1990 the city has grown by 92,410 residents or 18%. To accommodate the increase and a decreasing household size, there has been a steady growth of housing units especially in urban centers/villages, up-zones around the Link stations, and single unit teardowns and multiunit replacements along transit-served arterials. In 2008, city data indicated that we had already reached the halfway point to the 2004-2024 growth targets for increased density in urban centers/villages when finished units and permitted units are summed. The city has arguably met market demand except for units affordable to families with children. Not everyone is happy with the growth and the land use and demographic changes it has produced.

Regarding those units permitted by 2008, many haven't been built. I don't have numbers, but it seems likely that the actual halfway point will be more like 2013, based on reaching the numbers anticipated by permits that existed in 2008.

True, TomB, the mayor appears to be ignoring (and genuinely spiteful of) the business community, and tone deaf about a number of important issues. Suggesting that we close 99 is to many businesses and residents about the same as suggesting that we discontinue bus service. Both are absurd (ok I'd panic more about the bus service personally).

If the mayor is worried about seismic vulnerability, there are countless other buildings, bridges, etc., to close right now. Of course this hypocrite doesn't care abou that because no political points are in play for them.

"how could he have written so glowingly in The New York Times of Seattle’s showing the world the 'benefits of concentrating smart people in dense cities.'"

How indeed? Isn't this really about concentrating rich white people in dense cities? New York, Boston, San Francisco, even Portland are much whiter and wealthier, according to the 2010 Census. Gosh, let's get rid of all those awful poor people! Burien, Kent and Auburn are good enough places for them, and we can build light rail to shuttle them to their minimum-wage service jobs in the dense city. Brilliant!

"five out of the nine council members are up for election. That’s a referendum that will be on the ballot for Seattle voters this fall for sure."

Only if they have the right candidates in opposition. I.e., someone with clearly articulated and principled contrasting positions and enough money/political support to be "credible." For the most part, city council incumbents do not draw such candidates and unless they really screw up (like taking stripper joint money and getting caught) they are reelected without much problem.

"Mayor Mike McGinn is leading a close look at how to overhaul the land use code. He’s convened a round table of city staff and local leaders from the private and non-profit sectors to take a look at how we might better align our clunky code with our green and sustainable aspirations."

News to me. Who is sitting at this table? What's it called; where do I find out about it? It would nice if some neighborhood folks were included.

Toby Thaler, Chair, Fremont Neighborhood Council Land Use Committee

I echo Toby Thaler’s questions and concerns. Here in the utmost northern regions of Seattle we’re three months into the eighteen-month process of updating the 1990 Neighborhood Plan for the area extending from Puget Sound to 15th Avenue NE, (more than half of Seattle’s border with Shoreline, with Lake City lying to our east). While it is obvious that DPD, driving the process, is focused as always, on increasing density through traditional means such as up-zoning but is also dropping hints about creating new concepts such as “Urban Hamlets”, apparently islands of commercial activity in the sea of single-family zoning that currently exists outside of the already developed Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial zones. Of course the downside is that such an approach would seem to necessarily result in the destruction of existing single-family housing in order to develop the new commercial usage.

DPD, with the blessing of DoN, has contracted with the Urban Lands Institute (shades of Robert Moses?) to study our Hub Urban Village area and make recommendations for improved Transit options and perhaps Transit Oriented Development, with its state- mandated uber-density surrounding transit hubs.
While the ostensible purpose of the Neighborhood Plan update was to examine the actualities that had occurred since 1999 and to set new goals (not a single one of the Plan’s goals has been achieved, save the singular objective of closing Northwest Hospital’s exceedingly dangerous and toxic medical waste incinerator, an event that was actually accomplished outside of the Neighborhood Planning process by community activists}, the current Planning process sometimes seems to perhaps be segueing into yet another scheme to pack even more headcount into an area still lacking the infrastructure that it lacked several decades ago.

If there was now sufficient infrastructure to even carry the existing load, such as adequate mass-transit, sanitary sewers that didn’t periodically erupt volcano-like, storm sewers sized for real everyday storms, and the sidewalks promised more than half a century ago when this area was annexed from King County it would be much easier to gracefully absorb still more density.
Although these physical improvements have not yet materialized, this area has far exceeded population growth targets, while leaving us staring at a future that seems to be centered around cramming ever more people into ever-shrinking accommodations.

Perhaps Mayor McGinn and his round table team can turn this around.

I hope so. How do we access it?

Rick Barrett, Chair, Land Use Committee, Haller Lake Community Club.

"welcoming growth with open arms, and seeing the city — and our city in particular — as one of the solutions to the problems of global warming, air and water pollution,"

How can anyone be this stupid? He welcomes growth, but wants to solve global warming, and air and water pollution.

What do you think is causing global warming and air and water pollution?

GROWTH!

Growth is the problem. Growth is a cancer on the earth. Growth is what has caused global warming and pollution of all kinds.

It's idiots like the person who wrote this column who are the problem.

STOP GROWTH!

And he "welcomes growth." lol Unbelievable

Develop, baby, develop
By McGinn fanboy, Roger Valdez

Sorry the tax payers didn't gift every developer anything they ever wanted, Roger. Ask anybody the was getting railroaded in North Seattle if they give a ratsass about your benefactor's feelings. Gosh, it took too long to get a 24hour Fitness on the corner of NW Northgate Way & 5th, oh, how we suffered.

There may be a middle ground, but you are not in any position to find it, you're a McGinn water carrier, and he is a Vulcan lobbyist, still.

Rick Barrett, don't forget to mention that the 1990 "plan" stated that adding density without basic mobility infrastructure (sidewalks) would result in a dangerous environment. There are miles of open rain water run off ditches throughout North Seattle that it just seems absurd to read the word, "hamlet".

The city puts 4 blocks of sidewalk along Linden, patted themselves on the back, then packed that street with 3000 more people. It's a damn joke.

Developers are looking for city funded curb appeal for their giant codo cubes, and for some strange reason the people that live here, in the other Seattle, are not rolling over. Please, let's have another community meeting to find a way to piss away parks levy money on "pocket parks". Baugh!
Stay home Roger, and when I see McGinn tomorrow, I'll tell him the same.

Any realistic discussion of growth cannot avoid a careful look at the economic forces that drive the city, which is why I cannot accept a separation of an effective transportation policy--which includes adequate capacity for the port--from land use policy. Otherwise, more people will be living on a smaller economic pie. That means more strain on infrastructure (see Rick Barrett's comments), more broken promises to our friends north of 85th Street, unemployment, homelessness, etc.

Seattleites are often exhorted to be more like Portland. Having lived in both cities for extended periods of time, let me say that while Portland is a great city in many ways, there are aspects that Seattle should be less enthusiastic to embrace. Portland, as well as the whole state of Oregon, has chronically suffered from high unemployment and greater economic stagnation in recent years than the country at large. Policies to promote high density has created a haven for some demographics, such as single people in their 20s, but also created an environment hostile to families. That pushes the families, together with the best jobs, out to Beaverton, Hillsboro, and simply out of the region altogether, further exacerbating the economic stagnation of Portland itself. This has already started happening in Seattle, and the trend will continue unless the mayor and council get much more serious about both keeping the economy strong and the city a hospitable place for families.

Goals for Seattle 2000, how I miss you. Kids Place II, I can do without—"the wheels on the bus go round and round"— how did that go?

What war?

Oh right. The McGinn shop is treating the tunnel like a war - throwing everything at it at the cost of everything else.

Thankfully the City has figured out how to proceed with things despite the 7th floor.

But what a waste - of the resources of the Mayor's office.

The upcoming Council races will be helpful. Let's see how many candidates choose to emphasize that they are standing with Mike McGinn.

The bored tunnel is insanely risky to construct and it will make traffic worse than the surface/transit option. Mayor Mcginn is right to oppose the bored tunnel, but wrong to support Mercer West. And as for the new Alaskan Way boulevard, the current design disregards Seattle's desperate need for better transit service, puts bike lanes in traffic, bottlenecks thru-traffic with motorists trying to park, and turns its remaining elements of a working waterfront into even more of a tourist attraction.

DOT incompetence has failed Seattle so terribly with this public works project, corruption cannot be ruled out. Claim incompetence while you can, bored tunnel proponents, because you're not getting away with it scott free.

"Urbanist thought leader" is about the best triple oxymoron I expect to see all year.

Glad to hear from Wells that the Cut & Cover is the best solution. How do we get the city and state to start considering that again?

The answer to chybn's question is in the asking. As more people ask the question, the city and state will be forced to stop ignoring it or deflecting it with the deceitful answer that it was fairly considered and honestly presented to the public.

No other proposed configuration for the AWV matches the existing viaduct in any transportation related category. The rights of ways already exist. The configuration already can handle 110,000 vehicles a day. It already provides a bypass for downtown and off ramps for the core, Ballard and West Seattle. It already meets the demands for commercial vehicles. It can incorporate modern seismic protections and other enhancements for noise abatement, bikes, pedestrians and aesthetics. It acknowledges the fact that rubber-tired, multi-passenger vehicles are still the choice of over 90% of us. And it's billions of dollars cheaper than this present tunnel mistake in the making.

Still time to do the right thing.

As I was saying...

"New York City’s Population Barely Rose in the Last Decade, the Census Finds"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/nyregion/25census.html?_r=2&src;=me

So, why was it you urbists want to spend all the state's tax money "reurbanizing" when all its done so far is ruin neighborhoods, left half empty condoes and unrentable office buildings, the world's most expensive light rail and a potential 4 billion dollar boondoggle tunnel when "The City" is no more?!

Because the baby boomers have yet to call attention to the virtues of "mature growth"—getting wiser and wiser, instead of bigger and bigger (or as explained in a more conventional manner by Jon Talton in the Business section of today's Sunday Seattle Times).

After shipping well paying jobs out of the country and then importing people willing to do the jobs not highly thought of, its past time we figured out just what comes next.