Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, February 20, 2009
Media Joel Connelly Bends the Facts Again
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:56 PM
First of all, let me give P-I columnist Joel Connelly a whisper of props for at least acknowledging that if we're going to grow, that growth should be "concentrat[ed] around transit corridors."
But the rest of today's column—in which he mocks me for not being born here (got here quick as I could, Joel), refers to pro-density legislation as "authoritarianism" (yep, just like that fascist Growth Management Act) and suggests that "local initiative" from Seattle, Tacoma, and other cities in the region will ensure density happens in a way that makes everyone happy (because that's worked so well so far).
I won't belabor the silliness of those arguments. What I will say is that the premise of the entire column—its headline is "How will we fit 15 more Seattles here?"—is exactly the kind of fearmongering misrepresentation of facts that leads homeowners in single-family neighborhoods to shriek that environmentalists are "trying to force us to live in shoeboxes and give up our cars."
First, Connelly skips lightly over the fact that the projection he uses is for the next 100 years—a time horizon we need to plan for, yes, but not an influx that's going to change the face of our cities irreparably tomorrow. Moreover, the shorter the horizon, the more accurate the predictions. That's one reason most people who write about density (including reporters at the Seattle P-I) usually cite the Puget Sound Regional Council's forecast that the region will grow by 1.1 million by 2030.
Second, although Connelly's numbers sound scary, they're misleading. Here's where the "15 Seattles" number came from: According to the Cascade Land Conservancy, the population of the entire Puget Sound region is expected to "double in the next century, growing to more than 10 million people, about the size of Los Angeles today." In other words, the population of this region is going to grow to include the equivalent of one more Puget Sound region in the next 100 years. Much of that growth, according to Cascade Land Conservancy director Gene Duvorny, "is already here, in the sense that it is our kids and grandkids we’re talking about." So more accurate headline would've been "How will we accommodate 100-percent population growth in the next 100 years?"
But making it sound like Seattle is going to grow to 16 times its current size, tomorrow, makes for a much more eyeball-grabbing story.
1
aw, but he knew if he mocked you that you'd link his story and his hit rate would go up ... which it did.
hmmm.
sometimes you have to think past the initial reaction and realize the underlying motive.
hmmm.
sometimes you have to think past the initial reaction and realize the underlying motive.
3
Erica:
Apparently you are thinking only about central Puget Sound. The "region" in the column is the Pacific Northwest, from the lower mainland (and lower Vancouver Island) of British Columbia through the Willamette Valley of Oregon.
As well, such places as the high desert towns of Central Oregon and the 'burbs of Boise are growing hand over fist.
All of these regions will grow and grow. What you see along U.S. 2 in Snohomish County is replicated in the Fraser Valley of B.C.
Erica, you ought to get out and around a little bit, and see what's going on.
Erica:
Apparently you are thinking only about central Puget Sound. The "region" in the column is the Pacific Northwest, from the lower mainland (and lower Vancouver Island) of British Columbia through the Willamette Valley of Oregon.
As well, such places as the high desert towns of Central Oregon and the 'burbs of Boise are growing hand over fist.
All of these regions will grow and grow. What you see along U.S. 2 in Snohomish County is replicated in the Fraser Valley of B.C.
Erica, you ought to get out and around a little bit, and see what's going on.
4
Go back to Texas
Austin will have working light rail before Seattle does. Dallas has DART and Houston has light rail.
Meanwhile, Seattle continues to accomplish nothing. But Texas is sooo backwards.
Austin will have working light rail before Seattle does. Dallas has DART and Houston has light rail.
Meanwhile, Seattle continues to accomplish nothing. But Texas is sooo backwards.
5
Taking strong action now in anticipation of a 100 year growth trend is not a bad idea at all. This argument tends to focus on where all of these people are going to live, which will be relatively easy to solve compared to where is everybody going to get their water. California, with all of their other problems is going to get terribly squeezed by growth and climate change. We may face the exact same issues, sooner than later.
6
As a lifelong resident of the Pacific Northwest, it pisses me off to no end when other locals mock people for not being born here. It's the dumbest fucking thing, and it makes the rest of us look like a bunch of reactionary, elitist assholes.
Personally, I like living in a place where so many people come from different backgrounds and different parts of the world.
Personally, I like living in a place where so many people come from different backgrounds and different parts of the world.
8
don't worry. If ECB's famed "surface transit" ever gets implemented, so many jobs will be driven out it will actually decrease density. It's a "win win".
9
The difference is that most sprawling cities with light rail use their rail systems are extra freeway lanes to sprawl out development into the exurbs. Almost all of the rail stations in these cities are surrounded by sprawling parking lots. Their light rail is equivalent to our Sounder commuter rail.
Check out some of their rail stations -- they're nothing but gigantic parking lots with no density at all nearby. This is why we need greater density surrounding light rail stations.
DART Mockingbird Station (central Dallas):
http://tinyurl.com/dallas1
DART Parker Road Station (Plano, suburban Dallas):
http://tinyurl.com/dallas2
METRORail Museum District Station (central Houston):
http://tinyurl.com/houston1
METRORail Fannin South Station (outer Houston):
http://tinyurl.com/houston2
Austin will have working light rail before Seattle does. Dallas has DART and Houston has light rail.
The difference is that most sprawling cities with light rail use their rail systems are extra freeway lanes to sprawl out development into the exurbs. Almost all of the rail stations in these cities are surrounded by sprawling parking lots. Their light rail is equivalent to our Sounder commuter rail.
Check out some of their rail stations -- they're nothing but gigantic parking lots with no density at all nearby. This is why we need greater density surrounding light rail stations.
DART Mockingbird Station (central Dallas):
http://tinyurl.com/dallas1
DART Parker Road Station (Plano, suburban Dallas):
http://tinyurl.com/dallas2
METRORail Museum District Station (central Houston):
http://tinyurl.com/houston1
METRORail Fannin South Station (outer Houston):
http://tinyurl.com/houston2
10
@6, I like it when they come from different parts of the world and stay. I don't like it when they come from different parts of the U.S., stay a few years, then move to the next hip city (the "Stranger staff plan").
Listening to Erica bitch about long-term growth management is especially infuriating, since she'll be in Eugene, Fresno, Denver, or wherever the next "hot city" is long before the rest of us are dealing with the consequences of her actions.
I don't care if she goes back to Texas, but I wish she'd just leave Seattle already.
Listening to Erica bitch about long-term growth management is especially infuriating, since she'll be in Eugene, Fresno, Denver, or wherever the next "hot city" is long before the rest of us are dealing with the consequences of her actions.
I don't care if she goes back to Texas, but I wish she'd just leave Seattle already.
11
Fuck nativists.
Places without "transplants" wither and die. All the outsiders moving in are doing your beloved hometown a big fucking favor.
Don't want outsiders? I'm sure you'd switch places with Buffalo, right? Or Akron? These are two places which had huge numbers of migrants earlier in history but have managed to keep things static for a generation or two. Sounds like a recipe for a really appealing urban culture doesn't it, xenophobe?
Places without "transplants" wither and die. All the outsiders moving in are doing your beloved hometown a big fucking favor.
Don't want outsiders? I'm sure you'd switch places with Buffalo, right? Or Akron? These are two places which had huge numbers of migrants earlier in history but have managed to keep things static for a generation or two. Sounds like a recipe for a really appealing urban culture doesn't it, xenophobe?
13
keep fighting the good fight, ECB. They'll get it one of these days when they see that increased density and decreased driving is the ONLY sustainable solution.
14
@10 "I like it when they come from different parts of the world and stay. I don't like it when they come from different parts of the U.S., stay a few years, then move to the next hip city"
Point taken, and I agree. I've known plenty of those types, and they always have such pointed and obnoxious opinions on local issues, even though they won't be here long enough to experience the outcomes.
Point taken, and I agree. I've known plenty of those types, and they always have such pointed and obnoxious opinions on local issues, even though they won't be here long enough to experience the outcomes.
15
The Seattle xenophobia thing is cute- like we're some small town in the South: "you aint from 'round here are you partner?". Moreover, what exactly is the point of Joel's column? He seems to be admitting that density is preferable, but doesn't tell us how to achieve it. Those questions are beyond the purview of this column. One thing he does know, however, is that certain density advocates (*cough* Barnett *cough*) are nanny statist Chairman Maos for supporting policies which... promote density.
17
Erica, even though you're always wrong, even when you're right (you're a girl, you can't help it. I understand.), at least you're not obese like Joel Connelly. Every time I see him in public, I want to poke him with a needle and see what comes out.
He could fit Seattle inside of him. I'm sure of it.
He could fit Seattle inside of him. I'm sure of it.
18
How will native Seattlites deal with "15 more Seattles"...between BC and Portland? Well, if history is any indicator they'll just complain about how everything was better in the old days. Meanwhile, the people moving here will be doing the determining and dealing with, since they'll outvote the "natives" by a hundred to one.
19
Erica, you weren't born in Seattle? Shame on you and the other 80% of the population for whom that is the case. And me, for moving on (back) to the 'next (last) hot city' because Seattle's conventional wisdom seems to be directed by an overmind as dunderheaded as Joel Connelly's.
Yeah, God forbid the region should grow densely and with transit, since it's gonna grow anyway and there's nothing short of a constitutional convention that can stop it. Congrats Joel and the other anti-density jokers: when we're old Seattle will be JUST like mid-century Los Angeles (ruined) and it will take another half-century to start turning it around. Jesus, what a bunch of rubes.
Yeah, God forbid the region should grow densely and with transit, since it's gonna grow anyway and there's nothing short of a constitutional convention that can stop it. Congrats Joel and the other anti-density jokers: when we're old Seattle will be JUST like mid-century Los Angeles (ruined) and it will take another half-century to start turning it around. Jesus, what a bunch of rubes.
22
@10
"dealing with the consequences of her actions."
woah, dude. she writes for a fucking weekly. the main consequence of her actions is pissing of assholes who deserve to be pissed off, over and over, until they die.
"dealing with the consequences of her actions."
woah, dude. she writes for a fucking weekly. the main consequence of her actions is pissing of assholes who deserve to be pissed off, over and over, until they die.
23
The point is not who was born here or who was not. None of us had the luxury of making that choice.
The point is that if people in a certain city -- call it Lakewood, call it Burien, call it Moxee City or Airway Heights -- decide that they *want* Park and Ride lots near their transit stations, or that they want density maybe a *quarter* mile from their stations instead of half a mile, or that they *want* a parking space for every dwelling unit -- that *they* get to make that choice.
That's why this bill sucks -- even though my state Representative, who I admire and respect, is the prime sponsor of it -- and I hope it is killed stone cold dead.
It mandates a one-size-fits-all model on every city in the state. It trashes town plans that local governments and their citizens put in a lot of time developing, and spent a whole lot of taxpayer money doing so.
It causes not only residential dislocation, but also business dislocation. Small, locally owned businesses in a low-rise retail center near a transit station will DIE, forced out by mandated density, with unspecified "sanctions" for cities if they fail to implement the provisions of this bill.
But in the mind of Erica C. Barnett, our own little eco-Savonarola, one of the mullahs who lusts to enforce the sharia law of the Green Taliban, all this is necessary and desirable because of global warming bla bla bla, climate change bla bla bla, sustainability bla bla bla, and evil, EEEE-VIL cars and the infidels who drive them bla bla bla.
This bill sucks. It sucks diddly-ucks. It is elitist and antidemocratic. It is intrusive, coercive, and punitive.
Build the fucking transit, and let people, you know, decide for themselves how they want to deal with it. Please spare us this top-down crap.
More...
The point is that if people in a certain city -- call it Lakewood, call it Burien, call it Moxee City or Airway Heights -- decide that they *want* Park and Ride lots near their transit stations, or that they want density maybe a *quarter* mile from their stations instead of half a mile, or that they *want* a parking space for every dwelling unit -- that *they* get to make that choice.
That's why this bill sucks -- even though my state Representative, who I admire and respect, is the prime sponsor of it -- and I hope it is killed stone cold dead.
It mandates a one-size-fits-all model on every city in the state. It trashes town plans that local governments and their citizens put in a lot of time developing, and spent a whole lot of taxpayer money doing so.
It causes not only residential dislocation, but also business dislocation. Small, locally owned businesses in a low-rise retail center near a transit station will DIE, forced out by mandated density, with unspecified "sanctions" for cities if they fail to implement the provisions of this bill.
But in the mind of Erica C. Barnett, our own little eco-Savonarola, one of the mullahs who lusts to enforce the sharia law of the Green Taliban, all this is necessary and desirable because of global warming bla bla bla, climate change bla bla bla, sustainability bla bla bla, and evil, EEEE-VIL cars and the infidels who drive them bla bla bla.
This bill sucks. It sucks diddly-ucks. It is elitist and antidemocratic. It is intrusive, coercive, and punitive.
Build the fucking transit, and let people, you know, decide for themselves how they want to deal with it. Please spare us this top-down crap.
24
If you just "build the fucking transit", people will not decide for themselves how they want to deal with it--they will have to deal with however the chips fall. And those chips will fall with zero consideration for anything except what maximizes the ROI on that land.
25
oh, erica, haven't you figured out by now that joel just wants to get in your knickers? he certainly wouldn't be kvetching about eli sanders or jonah spangenthal-lee this way.
26
@24 - you already have to deal with it. Unlike your neocon vision of Soviet Amerika, we don't have to present papers when we move from city to city, Comrade.
And we're already zoned for a lot more density than you realize - city-wide.
And we're already zoned for a lot more density than you realize - city-wide.
28
No place as provincial as Seattle, that's for sure. Kind of beats out upper Dogpatch in that category. One time this guy was running for mayor? Name of Norm Rice? Anyway the paper said his home towm was Denver cuz that's where he wuz from like 35 years ago.
Most other places in the USA are much more welcoming. They're even interested in what it's like, in other cities! No shit!
Most other places in the USA are much more welcoming. They're even interested in what it's like, in other cities! No shit!
30
Hey Erica, thanks for letting us morons know that this will not happen in the next two weeks. Give me a fucking break.
31
Ivan @23 - maybe you'd chill if you actually understood the bill.
1. The bill would not ban parking in station areas -- it would ban parking minimums. Get it? A developer could put as many or as few parking stalls as they wished. Top down is code the requires parking, which currently exists in the vast majority of station areas outside Seattle.
2. The density threshold for allowed zoning is an average across the entire half-mile radius area. Get it? The means that a local community actually could decide that they want to put the density within a quarter-mile, or anywhere else within the half mile that made sense for the given context.
1. The bill would not ban parking in station areas -- it would ban parking minimums. Get it? A developer could put as many or as few parking stalls as they wished. Top down is code the requires parking, which currently exists in the vast majority of station areas outside Seattle.
2. The density threshold for allowed zoning is an average across the entire half-mile radius area. Get it? The means that a local community actually could decide that they want to put the density within a quarter-mile, or anywhere else within the half mile that made sense for the given context.
32
ECB gets so excited (!!) when she gets noticed by the big newspapers! I didn't read any of this post, by the way.
33
You all say develop those station areas and THAT will stop sprawl!!! Take a google earth look at transit station areas around the country and look at those touted as the great examples. Sprawl is stopped where Sprawl is stopped. Has nothing to do with whether we legislate a big developers' wet dream called TOD Washington State style.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
-
Announcing The Stranger's Tournament of Dunces! Who's the Dumbest Representative in the State House? by Christopher Frizzelle
-
Republicans Put Gay Marriage on the Ballot at Their Own Risk by Goldy
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (33) RSS