Cleaning out the trash, if you know what I mean, is a whole other issue altogether.

Sports fans do not browse in bookstores or antique shops on their way to the game? Would you like a pitchfork for that bullshit?

I know a whole hell of a lot of sports fans who do just that.

Where's the schools?

Where's the playgrounds?

Why should the rest of Seattle subsidize the ultra-rich while much of Seattle still doesn't have sidewalks?

Look at all the affordable development going on around the downtown core. Tremendous quantities of new housing in Pioneer Square, Belltown, South Lake Union, the new Stadium District.

Where in the world are the schools to serve these people? Where are the open public space? How about public transportation.

It's truly great that these dense new urban neighborhoods are being created. But there's a lot of infrastructure still needed to support the housing, and I don't see it being developed at the same rate.

Please explain how this project is being "subsidized" by the rest of Seattle? If anything, developments such as this subsidize improvements to the neighborhood that otherwise would not occur.

Anyone without a sidewalk in front of their homes may petition the city to build one, at the home owners expense (most of the time at an unequal level with the bulk being on the homeowner), on city right-of-way (the grass side of the road where those residents park). Some neighborhoods have over the years increased their property taxes so that everyone (for a fraction of the cost a single home owner would spend) would have a sidewalk infront of the house and extending down every road in the neighborhood (when compared to only the "main" drags which have the sidewalk/road combo). While sidewalks do encourage people to walk, which is great for the "Greater Good", they are not encouragement enough (for rich/moderate/low income folks) to cough up dough for something they will get very little direct benefit from. Most folks in Seattle don't see value in spending hundreds or thousands of dollars for sidewalks to the corner store when they can walk there now for free (al beit in the gutter, dodging traffic).

That is also not even counting the number of neighborhood associations who kill any proposed plans to build sidewalks for any number of reasons that never get any airing in the media.

You miss the point entirely. When the area north of 85th was annexed by Seattle, the City promised that it would install sidewalks. They're still waiting 50+ years later.

You don't seriously expect people to live there with a bus system that's SLOWER than WALKING, do you?

as to [Bailey] Gatzert grade school and Washington Middle School, plus Garfield High and Center School - get real. Do you know how LONG it takes to get to those schools from that area of town? Now try to do it on a Game Day! Now try to do it on a Game Day while the Viaduct is being rebuilt for 8-10 years!

Again, no schools. Excuses don't work.

my son used to go to Paideia Academy, a Montessori school in the building next to SAM, don't give me excuses.

By the way, the city aleady plans to build at public expense a massive new garage for Allentown in South Lake Union. So much for the pedestrian friendly hype.

Don't be surprised if a goodly number of these new downtown residents work on the Eastside and therefore drive.

As far as I can tell nowhere. Maybe you're thinking of the new garage at Seattle Center to take the place of the parking lot the Gates Foundation bought. But that's on the other side of Aurora not in South Lake Union.

My point stands. Sure, the city promised sidewalks around 1960 and the homeowners north of 85 (greenwood/carkeek park neighborhoods, etc. etc.) could organize to force the city to come clean on its promise, or come up with a plan to tax themselves as a community to install sidewalks, or just pay for the damn things themselves. But they don't.

Too bad for folks that rent and take the bus in those areas that the homeowners won't cough up the dough for sidewalks. But renters can move once they get tired of bitching. I hated the area for that exact reason that lots of roads lacked safe places to walk and the bus service was spotty. I, like tons of other folks, moved into a neighborhood that does have sidewalks and good bus service. I am glad to see these big developments going into areas that have sidewalks and good bus service already in place. Those developments will be of assistance right away and not 50+ years away.

I think I am the last person remaining in Seattle who actually enjoys, appreciates, supports and would argue for the benefits of affordable and available street level parking.

I feel like Charlton Heston in "The Omega Man.

pg

PS--A development this size and in this location will also make "earthquake roulette" in this whole area a lot more fun, won't it? Especially if we're still trying to figure out what to do about the Viaduct...

My point stands. Sure, the city promised sidewalks around 1960 and the homeowners north of 85 (greenwood/carkeek park neighborhoods, etc. etc.) could organize to force the city to come clean on its promise, or come up with a plan to tax themselves as a community to install sidewalks, or just pay for the damn things themselves. But they don't. 50 years is a long time and the blame is not 100% in the Seattle's lap.

Too bad for folks that rent (no homeowner status) and take the bus/walk in those areas. Its the homeowners that need to cough up the dough for sidewalks. But then, the residents in those areas might need to stop parking on their front lawns. But renters are lucky in that they can move once they get tired of bitching. I hated the area for that exact reason and exercised my right not to live there. There were way to many roads lacking safe places to walk and the bus service was spotty. I, like tons of other folks, moved to different a neighborhood. One that does have sidewalks and good bus service. I am glad to see these big developments going into areas that have sidewalks and good bus service already in place (to mention only two). Those developments will be of assistance right away and not 50+ years later.

You can yell all you want, but it doesn't make you correct.

First off, North Seattle has always been considered a more desirable area of the City than South Seattle (Lake City would probably be the exception, here) - until property values went through the roof, these neighborhoods were basically solidly middle to upper middle class (btw - when I lived in Montlake in the 70's, it was considered pretty scummy, but that was also in the wake of the Boeing bust). I have nothing against low-income neighborhoods, mind you (I live in one, in fact), but by no stretch of the imagination could you call North Seattle "low income" - not then, not now.

The City promised to provide sidewalks when the area was annexed - not an opportunity to pay a shitload of money for them to be provided. So you can bitch all you want, but the promise was made and not kept, and the City has instead chosen to fund art museums, stadia, and symphony halls instead of basic infrastructure (North Highline and White Center take note).

It's a pity you can't pave a street with self-righteousness - you'd have the problem covered.

No, you're not. Far from it, in fact.

Unfortuately, small business owners and the 80% of Seattleites who rely on cars to get around apparently don't read or post on Slog.

The lack of sidewalks is embarassing in a "hick" way (especially to tourist-residents who did not come-of-age in Seattle and have no fondness for the 'what was' but only the 'what will be' (like our Chicago born mayor)), so the issue doesn't get the public debate (its a "black sheep" issue. important? yes. something you want the whole world to know about? nope, goes against the metropolitan feel the city government is trying to cultivate.) But property owners don't really don't care enough about sidewalks to start writing checks, only to complain about shit.

So what? A 50 year old promise was made to the voters who approved the annex 50 years ago by the City government. Everyone knows that and the North Seattle "middle income" folks(sorry if I offend. My labeling your neighborhood as "low-income", I was going by AHA and SHA housing demographics. That is why these mixed income developments in the downtown area are being built because North and South Seattle has historically been home to the bulk of subsidized housing in the city. subsidized housing = low income) in 2006, are "living with the sins of our parents and grandparents". Their 'sin' was not forcing the sidewalk issue to a point of winning say, anytime before now. They, our grandparents and parents, never, ever, forced the city to make good on that promise. Nor did the grandparents and parents of other areas force the sidewalk issue. Which is a shame, but, hey, if sidewalks in a neighborhood is important, then move to one of those neighborhoods or pay for them yourselves.

It is easy to say, but today's residents should, should if sidewalks are as big a deal as the Viaduct, mass transit, failing roads, should organize, find a good lawyer, pony up the fees for said lawyer, and force the city to make good on any and all legally binding promises. But, um, when they win, where will the money come from to? Taxes. Which puts us back to the big picture reason why nobody who owns property in the area wants those sidewalks so badly that they stop bitching about them and do something. But, no one wants to pay for them, either as a single home owner or as a taxpayer.

On the other hand, the City won't even put a sidewalk on busy 30th Ave NE next to U-Village despite the neighborhood coming up with matching money, so you're pretty much just talking out of your ass anyway.

It's nice to know how important you think keeping promises is, too...

Another new parking garage for Seattle Center? I hadn't heard about that one...

Re: the parking giveaways to be anticipated for Allentown: Due to lack of public information, I can’t presume to anticipate the full and exact details of estimated parking garage subsidies for Allentown, but so I’ll have to wait and see how much the few financial projections available turn out. Keep in mind that, not counting the Allen-sponsored press conferences where city staffers are paid to attend as audience members, there have still been ZERO—zilch—council hearings for the public to ask questions or raise concerns about the untold millions (I’ve heard anything from $350 to $500 million) in city subsidies for Allentown.

The city council has passed a number of seemingly repetitious pro-Allentown resolutions, and it’s anyone’s guess how many financial loopholes have been slipped into those resolutions. (For example, some of the resolutions say that the city will “maximize” its financial assistance to Allentown.) Under current circumstances, the last concrete example I can give to you about parking subsidies is a five-year-old SLU historical document along the lines of “Allen determined to strike in South Lake Union.” The outdated 2001 document appears as an SLU protocol agreement on the city website at: www.seattle.gov/ppp/slu.

According to that protocol document, some portion of the parking subsidies will include Allen building 160 parking spaces and selling them to the city for 55K each ($8.8 million total in 2001 dollars). Keep in mind that the SLU streetcar, which cost the city $25 million in subsidies directly benefiting Allen, wasn’t even imagined by the original protocol, so who knows how many millions in other costs have been added since then or will be added.

Sorry I can’t give you more specific data, but that would appear to be the way the city and Allen both want it right now.

- Creek

Well... does Yesler Terrace or the International district have playgrounds? Pratt park isn't that far, its like a mile, mile and half up Jackson from the stadium.

Yesler Terrace will be going through a remodel I hear, will the plans include a public swingset?

But that is a great question. Will any of these big fance developments have swingsets? monkey bars? Kids have to run and play or else they turn into blimbs, you know? Shit likes thats important went the lard comes home crying and a parent has to do something to help out.

BTW, $500/sq ft? Plus? Has real estate gone up that much since I bought my townhouse loft condo on Capitol Hill? I thought I was paying through the nose...

The truth is that mixed use projects such as this are the ones that are subsidizing the pseudo-suburban malcontents such as Will. Interesting article in today's PI about the annexation of North Highline. Without state and fed help, this neighborhood would cost our fair city $5 million a year!

A direct quote from the article: "Like nearly all residential areas in Seattle, it would be a drain on the city. Because property taxes fail to generate enough revenue to pay for city services, business and other taxes from Seattle's downtown commercial core subsidize virtually all residential neighborhoods in the city, officials say."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/276799_annexation07.html

Hey Will - maybe you'd be so kind as to do a little research in the future before subjecting us all to your hyperbolic drivel.