City End Zone
posted by on December 18 at 14:58 PM
A few of Georgetown’s 1200 residents are glum today. Despite waging an aggressive email campaign against a fast-moving bill to rezone the industrial lands surrounding their neighborhood, the city council passed the measure 6-3 last night.
“Disappointing would be an understatement,” says Kathy Nyland, who owns a retail shop in Georgetown. In effect, Nyland and neighbors argued, the new restrictions represent a downzone that could turn Georgetown into an industrial wasteland.
“There is no proposal to reduce industrial uses on industrial lands,” says Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck, who introduced the bill. “How can you call that a downzone?”
In a nutshell, the legislation limits new commercial developments to 25,000 square feet in Seattle’s industrial zones—still allowing stores and offices as large as the PCC in Fremont. But the new rules ban big-box developments, such as Safeways and Targets, which would displace large industrial businesses and could devastate Georgetown’s neighborhood economy. Previous rules allowed commercial developments up to 100,000 square feet in Seattle’s 5000 acres of industrial-zoned land.
Councilmember Richard Conlin thought the council needed more time to examine the bill. He proposed two eleventh-hour amendments: one delaying the vote for the new council next year and another exempting the area surrounding Georgetown from the regulations. Both proposals fell one vote short of passing.
Joel Ancowitz, who owns a house in Georgetown, says, “They [the four who supported the amendment to exempt Georgetown] understand the special nature of the renaissance in my neighborhood and they understand the importance of protecting it for the good of all Seattle.”
However, the legislation only applies to future developments beyond the neighborhood’s borders, so concerns seem less about protecting what is already there and more that the rezoning would hamper Georgetown’s expansion. And with 25,000 square feet still allowed, I don’t think Georgetown is stifled: That’s plenty of room for artist lofts and small businesses.
After a protracted debate, the council’s prevailing sentiments were that Seattle had sufficiently studied the issue, held forums for public input, and that the encroaching conversions of industrial lands for commercial uses compelled the council to act immediately. A companion resolution to study its impacts passed unanimously.
The bill’s quick acceleration from committee to vote – in only three weeks – inspired numerous conspiracy theories, one of which Josh examines here. Another is that by excluding major commercial development from southern Seattle’s industrial expanse, offices would be pushed into South Lake Union—which, with the SLUT’s debut journey last week, has been repackaged for high-end development (SLU mastermind Mayor Nickels initiated the rezone for Seattle’s industrial land when he proposed a more restrictive version of the legislation in September). My favorite theory, however, is that this legislation is Steinbrueck’s gift to a blue-collar workforce that could support him in a mayoral bid in 2009—Steinbrueck leaves the council later this month.
I don't get it. Why are they upset? They WANT office towers and Wal-Mart?
"Industrial wasteland"??? They moved there AFTER the industrial zoning. They could benefit from retail and industrial jobs. Not sure that any offices would move down there though....sort of far.
"...the new restrictions represent a downzone that would turn Georgetown into an industrial wasteland."
georgetown already is an industrial wasteland. have you ever been there? it is full of ugly and gorgeous industrial plants, pollution-filled parks, run-down homes and it is beautiful that way. quit the crying, at least their soccer field is now turf instead of dirt.
Taco Bell!!
Steinbrueck realizes this is necessary to preserve real industry in Seattle and wants to add one more achievement to his legacy of preserving the city's character. Those complaining were speculating on higher property values if industry could be chased out the Georgetown area.
The question is which will hurt us more in the long run? Subsidizing dirty industry on land worth much more than it is being paid for or risking industrial sprawl by letting supply and demand do its thang in Georgetown?
Seems like feel-good legislation to me. Probably not worth it in the long run.
Does this mean that Georgetown won't end up like Renton? That city looks like a bad episode of Nip/Tuck. It would make me so sad to see large scale cookie cutter architecture invade airport way. Some of my favorite Seattle buildings are along that route.
For the record, folks. Georgetown was arguing for due process. Steinbruecks Bill contained so many unknowns (all of the Council Members admitted this to be true which is why they attached a resolution to the Bill demanding another of year of study).
This was about how issues concerning the south end of our city are treated very differently than issues concerning the north. Case in point, the re-zoning of South Lake Union took public comment for over a year. The re-zoning of South Seattle yesterday took 3 weeks.
The people of Georgetown were fighting for good public process for all of us.
Do any Stranger writers actually go further south than Madison? And @6,unless Seatac and Boeing Field flight paths were to go away, there's very little chance that Georgetown would ever become the next Belltown. More like Burien--at best, and that's only if the Port of Seattle were to offer the same noise abatement packages that they were forced to give out to people living under the approach paths. Seems sensible to maintain viable heavy industry in this town--pays for a lot of people's groceries.
@ 9, I live south of Madison.
Mmmmmmm. Georgetown. Tomorrow is Bike Night at Smarty Pants. Yesssss. Yes, indeed.
Good framing, Cale. But remember that "dirty industry" is a loaded term. Another legitimate view of what the zoning protects is "a decent manufacturing and industrial-service base so that not everyone has to pull shots for a living."
And props to Mr. Feit for naming the electoral benefit to Steinbrueck. I don't think Steinbrueck is just posing, though; it reads as pretty consistent with what interests him.
But anything that helps Steinbrueck run for mayor is good. Warts and all, he's the only candidate with moxie enough to engage Nickels and his paymasters on all fronts through a long campaign. It's been a while since we've had something cool like that.
@2 says it best.
The 21st Century will usher in Green Industry, and if America is to survive, instead of go down the tubes GWB is greasing for us, we need to export it worldwide.
Georgetown can either adapt ... or not.
Isn't Georgetown both seismically hazardous - built on incompetent soil prone to liquifaction in an earthquake - and in a lahar danger zone from Mount Rainier?
Developing that area further seems like a monumentally bad idea.
What made Georgetown cool was that it WAS industrial - no need to change it.
Steinbrueck agreed to pass Nickel's Industrial Downzone in exchange for Nickel's agreeing to Steinbrueck's Amazon.com / Vulcan and Starbucks Expansion public benefits packages.
@14 - And sitting on a lot of toxic and industrial residue. Even though Sabey was very interested in having them stay, Georgetown Brewing's moving out of the Rainier Cold Storage principally because they couldn't build out on the site. Portions of the fill that the complex is on top of are still thawing from the decades of use. The whole block has been gradually sinking for years. Better hope Sabey drives some really deep piles for the foundation of the new condo complex.
And you definitely don't want to know about a near-century's worth of paint manufacture, metal plating, and other Superfund activities in the neighborhood. I love Georgetown, but don't think I'd want to do large-scale commercial development there.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).