Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Ellen and The Bush | Assignment : Help a Vet Squee... »

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Aurora Business Owners Worried About Their Backdoors

posted by on December 5 at 14:33 PM

Aurora Avenue North businesses between North 110th Street and North 145th Street are having a huge problem with backdoor access. “Out of 145 businesses in the area, 117 [would] have no backdoor access,” says Aurora Avenue Merchants Association Executive Director Faye Garneau.

The city is planning to expand the sidewalks along Aurora Avenue North and add 24-hour bus-only lanes, which would make on-street parking and freight access more difficult. “We find that quite upsetting,” Garneau says.

The plan would also take portions of properties currently occupied by thrift stores, motels, and social security offices.

Garneau says the city has been unresponsive to negotiations and that a lawsuit may become necessary to protect Aurora businesses. “We may have to get to that point,” she says. “We’re hoping not to.”

RSS icon Comments

1

Wait, let me get this straight.

The people north of N 100th have been complaining for years that they don't have sidewalks and need more bus service ...

Then the city goes and decides to build the sidewalks and ramps up the bus service to 24 hour bus service in dedicated lanes so they can get to/from there quickly ...

And they complain?

Hmmm. I got an answer for them ... STFU!

Posted by Will in Seattle | December 5, 2007 3:21 PM
2

If I were on Aurora Avenue, I'd be worried about my backdoor as well.

Posted by Gomez | December 5, 2007 3:25 PM
3

I heard there's a lot of backdoor access on Aurora.

Posted by Big Sven | December 5, 2007 3:29 PM
4

Goddamnit, Gomez beat me to it.

Posted by Big Sven | December 5, 2007 3:29 PM
5

Very funny. The fact is, the city has been trying to turn Aurora into a freeway for decades. The city HATES anything that might impede the 45 MPH progress of cars and buses.

By taking away the street parking, they render the sidewalks UTTERLY USELESS, as there is no buffer between you and the traffic. Go look at Aurora in Shoreline, and tell me how much foot traffic their fancy new sidewalks are getting: zero, except from a handful of hookers.

This plan is killing small businesses in Seattle for the benefit of suburban commuters to downtown.

Posted by Fnarf | December 5, 2007 3:35 PM
6

FNARF hits the nail on the head yet again.

Aurora Avenue definitely ain't fancy, but it does generate a good portion of the City's general fund tax revenue.

Besides, where else can you buy guns, pho, and cheap socks at K-Mart all in one trip?

Posted by Mr. X | December 5, 2007 3:50 PM
7

Fnarf, have you ever been up there? Seriously, all the business have monster parking lots.

I drive by there maybe every week or two.

Posted by Will in Seattle | December 5, 2007 3:59 PM
8

To quote the great Les Clinkingbeard, "if it's up Aurora, it's up you ass".

Posted by dumper | December 5, 2007 4:20 PM
9

Are you a complete idiot, Will? I drive Aurora almost every day. I've been on it today. The businesses do NOT all have huge parking lots. Maybe you should drive with your eyes open, hmm?

Posted by Fnarf | December 5, 2007 4:25 PM
10

Fnarf is right.

We want better bus service but not at the cost of destroying the walkability of the sidewalks.

Posted by unPC | December 5, 2007 4:41 PM
11

@ 7, Fnarf already let you know but since I lived there for nearly 5 years I'll add my two cents. Maybe Rite Aid, K Mart, Home Depot, and the Oak Tree S.C. have big parking lots but there are lots of storefronts along that stretch of Aurora with nothing but street parking available. You know, small businesses, the ones everyone who hates Walmart brings up when assailing the evils of big box retail. Of course they're not hip stores - pawn shops, second hand porn, psychics, Vietnamese travel agents, recycled computers and other shops not found in Capital Hill, Fremont or Ballard. It won't help anyone if all those places are run out of business and leave behind empty storefronts.

Posted by Matt from Denver | December 5, 2007 4:48 PM
12

OMG!!! THE STRANGER ADMITTED THAT A PART OF THE CITY N OF 85TH IS PART OF SEATTLE!!!!!!!!!!!

On the bitching about sidewalks, the problem isn't that Aurora lacks them (which it does north of the cemetery), but that the neighborhood streets lack them.

Turning the third lane on Aurora into an HOV lane sounds great, but most of the small businesses between 117th and Winona have no parking lots. And honestly, the 358 moves pretty well, when it's not ridiculously delayed to the point that 3 buses come at once. Which happens a lot. And that's not really going to change with bus lanes since Metro pretty much doesn't think anyone in the northwest part of the city rides the bus.

In the post-695 days before Metro got that tax increase through, the 358 ran once every 20 minutes, once every 10 at rush hour. And it was sardine-packed by the time it reached 85th. Forget it if you're trying to catch it at 46th.

Of course, with the new strip club zoning they can stack strip clubs 10 deep on Aurora north of 125th. That should mean all the Capitol Hill and UW frathouse folks will be clamoring for a direct route from Broadway and the Ave to Aurora soon enough. All the better for me, because I'm tired of the 90 minute Aurora-U District bus ride.

Posted by dw | December 5, 2007 5:07 PM
13

Well, I can see how you might be upset, but there's tons of on-street parking if you just go to the end of the block.

Admittedly, some of the blocks are huge, but those are mostly the ones with giant parking lots in the first place.

Want sidewalks and more transit? Deal with it.

Posted by Will in Seattle | December 5, 2007 5:55 PM
14

Fuck you, Will. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and you're conflating several different issues, none of which you have even the tiniest grasp of. Your inane drivel is driving me around the bend. And I'm surprised you're even ALLOWED to drive.

The businesses along Aurora do not "want sidewalks"; they HAVE sidewalks. They want to avoid having the city destroy the very reason for having them. And they have transit. The people who want sidewalks, because they don't have them, are DIFFERENT PEOPLE, in a DIFFERENT PLACE. Jesus.

Posted by Fnarf | December 5, 2007 6:45 PM
15

Um, dw, I LIVE north of 85th.

Posted by jonah s | December 5, 2007 7:28 PM
16

Can we maybe put sidewalks in where people actually live and *walk*?!?

Posted by Fire F. Ly | December 5, 2007 8:12 PM
17

Um, dw, I LIVE north of 85th.

I don't believe you. I need to see some ID. Or at least some sort of shibboleth that proves you're a Northerner.

Posted by dw | December 5, 2007 11:02 PM
18

Best Slog post title ever.

Posted by md | December 6, 2007 4:50 AM
19

Will really isn't there somewhere you can talk about 100 story low cost housing and the February ST2.1 vote?

Small stores do depend on parking in front of their stores. People won't walk 1/2 a block for an impulse stop maybe not for a planned one.

It would be nice to see some bigger apartment houses going up on Aurora with retail as it would seem by very nature of the location the housing would remain affordable.

Posted by whatever | December 6, 2007 9:17 AM
20

Look out for your backdoor if you live near Aurora. Word on the street is public use parking lots to make up for the bus lane and wide sidewalks. So much for your property rights in a property rights state.

Posted by deadwood | December 7, 2007 11:10 AM
21

mcuekwtrs zlefau kmvs polt hidlygok cfmszvn oyjcavir

Posted by lcevpoa nltcvi | December 16, 2007 8:08 AM
22

ripmqg zylejqa dshrayjg btknvy uknvsamrl bmplxie lnishkxeo http://www.rwpc.impqlnwc.com

Posted by dheark vskm | December 16, 2007 8:09 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).