Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, March 17, 2009
City / Mailbag Letter from an Angry Reader
Posted by Christopher Frizzelle on Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:42 AM
Presumably in response to this (though this must be an old anger, considering Josh Feit hasn't worked at The Stranger since last spring), a reader writes:
I'm really sick of Erica Barnett, Josh Feit and the whole pack of pro-density, eco-nazis at The Stranger. You all came here from somewhere else, and you all want this place to be some kind of "green" version of New York. Despite all your years of howling and hand-wringing, despite all your pro-transit rants and your bike lane bullshit, it's NOT!If you like big, overcrowded, noisy, expensive East Coast cities so much, why don't you go fucking live there!! Stop trying to jam that shit down our throats!
Fuck the whole bunch of you.
Jef Jaisun
Green before you were born, beyatches!
In other news: I miss Josh Feit.
4
yeah, no doubt, have lived here or close by for 45 years and want to see some planned density...green too. need a new mayor for that though, and some city councilmembers with some vision
5
Dear Jeff,
Cities grow. If you don't like living in a city that is increasingly big, overcrowded, noisy, and expensive, go fucking live elsewhere.
The Stranger can't control growth -- we can make it happen, or make it stop. The Stranger's writers just want the growth that's coming our way to be well-managed.
Did you know you can buy a house right now in detroit for under $1000? The city is small and getting smaller, not crowded at all, quiet ('cept the gunfire), and cheap, cheap, cheap. Why don't you go fucking live there?
Dan
7
A "green version of New York City"? New York is already the greenest city in the nation. He really doesn't get it.
8
@5 Hey here's an idea! Why don't you and all of your pro gay, pro density cohorts all collectively pack up and move to Detroit yourselves? Think about it! Ohh the opportunity for all of you! Cheap living, cheap housing, an increasingly vacant city just ripe for dense planning, living, working! Just think! YOU could be mayor of GAYVILLE!
I happen to STRONGLY AGREE with the original poster. Erica should take her fucking pathetic density pro bicyclist cabal and MOVE THE FUCK OUT!
WE don't want her petty theft shoplifting fat a$$ in the city any longer!
Thanks for listening!
I happen to STRONGLY AGREE with the original poster. Erica should take her fucking pathetic density pro bicyclist cabal and MOVE THE FUCK OUT!
WE don't want her petty theft shoplifting fat a$$ in the city any longer!
Thanks for listening!
10
Jef Jaison has made a cottage industry of writing letters to the editors of the times and p.i. for years. His photography, music, and nimbyism pretty much suck ass.
12
Yeah... I'm with @2. I like it here, partly because of the smarter, more conscientious people--and yes, I have lived places other than my native Seattle. Greenness and sustainability (and, by extension, density and bike lanes) are not optional to my city, which was ahead of the environmental consciousness curve long before I was born.
13
I really liked his note -- New York City is green, but it accomplishes it through intense density, small unliveable apartments, and people being packed in like sardines. There's this naivety to the density activists here who seem to think we can recreate a kinder gentler version of New York in a city with completely different geography, an entrenched car culture, and very few dependable, frequent forms of public transportation.
I don't know if this is what the original poster meant and he probably could have made his point better, but it's easy to talk about the beauty of density when you've never experienced anything except wide open spaces and a guilty reliance on personal transport.
Density will mean a decrease in your quality of life -- we can limit how much, but I will not be the same green-covered city we have now.
I don't know if this is what the original poster meant and he probably could have made his point better, but it's easy to talk about the beauty of density when you've never experienced anything except wide open spaces and a guilty reliance on personal transport.
Density will mean a decrease in your quality of life -- we can limit how much, but I will not be the same green-covered city we have now.
14
Why did Jef take the time to send a letter? Why didn't simply post a comment to Slog under his usual nom de plume Mr. X?
15
Wait, is this the same Jef Jaisun who wrote "Friendly Neighborhood Narco Agent" about 30 years ago?
Sounds like somebody's become his parents...
Sounds like somebody's become his parents...
16
So did I miss something? Did ECB get busted for shoplifting? I can't imagine that level of schadenfreude.
18
@13 ftw
He makes a very very valid point. There are many of us who agree with this sentiment. I personally get tired of constantly listening to ECB rant about another minority agenda for bicycles and transit. I wish the Stranger would make their tiny group of writers each find 3 new topics to focus on a regular basis.
It does get extremely old seeing the same shit/different day stories that they are allowed to constantly push.
The Stranger is fast becoming irrelevent with the lack of original ideas and pushing the same three agendas of
1. more bicycle rights/bicycle lanes/bicycle travel
2. increased density/building higher/zero architecture
3. pro transit / anti cars
4. pro gay rights to the exclusivity of all others
He makes a very very valid point. There are many of us who agree with this sentiment. I personally get tired of constantly listening to ECB rant about another minority agenda for bicycles and transit. I wish the Stranger would make their tiny group of writers each find 3 new topics to focus on a regular basis.
It does get extremely old seeing the same shit/different day stories that they are allowed to constantly push.
The Stranger is fast becoming irrelevent with the lack of original ideas and pushing the same three agendas of
1. more bicycle rights/bicycle lanes/bicycle travel
2. increased density/building higher/zero architecture
3. pro transit / anti cars
4. pro gay rights to the exclusivity of all others
19
uh, if the majority of Seattle citizens feel the same way as fucktwit #8 then why do they keep voting YES for pro-transist/pro-density measures at election time?
20
@16 here is the info:
http://blog.capitolhillseattle.com/2009/…
I am saddened that the slog is not bringing this up. Transparency and all that. Her hearing is supposed to be today. Perhaps we will hear something soon.
http://blog.capitolhillseattle.com/2009/…
I am saddened that the slog is not bringing this up. Transparency and all that. Her hearing is supposed to be today. Perhaps we will hear something soon.
21
@16 YES ECB did shoplift.
Funny how it isn't a story isn't it? You would think that she would somehow own up to it?
Why has there been no SLOG post about it?
Is she not remorseful?
Does she think she is better than everyone else?
You bet your sweet ass she does.
Funny how it isn't a story isn't it? You would think that she would somehow own up to it?
Why has there been no SLOG post about it?
Is she not remorseful?
Does she think she is better than everyone else?
You bet your sweet ass she does.
22
@13 and @18
You guys are missing the point. Cities grow. Your quality of life is going to drop, one way or the other. Planning "Density" is all about providing the best quality of life for the given hordes.
You guys are missing the point. Cities grow. Your quality of life is going to drop, one way or the other. Planning "Density" is all about providing the best quality of life for the given hordes.
23
jigae @13, i live in new york city and i don't know what the fuck you're talking about. i have a great quality of life, roughly the same if not better than when i lived in seattle. sure, i had more space and parquet floors in seattle, but here i have rich cultural diversity and boundless vibrant energy. not a bad trade really. the fact that you seem to think of new york as some sort of perpetual law & order episode indicates that you ought to watch less tv and maybe actually travel more. for me, like most decent people, my neighbors are people i try to get to know and accept. the density of this city is a marvelous part of my every day.
the ultimate point to all of this is that density is coming, you can't avoid it, but you can manage it so it benefits your city. this is what the stranger is advocating.
the ultimate point to all of this is that density is coming, you can't avoid it, but you can manage it so it benefits your city. this is what the stranger is advocating.
24
If these people did in fact speak for a majority they'd have nothing to panic about.
Political strategy advice of the day (free of charge): Trying to build a winning coalition by haranguing your opponents to move away? Not promising.
Political strategy advice of the day (free of charge): Trying to build a winning coalition by haranguing your opponents to move away? Not promising.
25
If there was anger against that CRAPPY Barnett story on John Fox, that anger would have been about her CRAPPY journalism.
But there is an underlying truth about what 'Jef' says.
While many of us here (new and old-timers alike) want density and transit, the Stranger's unabashed rah-rah for ANY OLD DENSITY, CRAPPY BUILDINGS, and things like HB1490's Transit ADJACENT development shows an absolute LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of the issues, KNEE JERK pile-on, and (as I mentioned before) CRAPPY journalism.
Other than that, everything's A-OK.
But there is an underlying truth about what 'Jef' says.
While many of us here (new and old-timers alike) want density and transit, the Stranger's unabashed rah-rah for ANY OLD DENSITY, CRAPPY BUILDINGS, and things like HB1490's Transit ADJACENT development shows an absolute LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of the issues, KNEE JERK pile-on, and (as I mentioned before) CRAPPY journalism.
Other than that, everything's A-OK.
26
@22: But there's a difference between "guided growth" and pushing "density" as an end in itself. People seem obsessed with the idea of it without understanding the reality that accompanies it.
@23: I lived in New York for many years and now I live here because I wanted more open spaces. I miss the energy and cultural diversity every day. It's a trade off. Trying to increase Seattle's density would drive many people away from here -- You'd have added the inconveniences of New York without adding all the things that make it wonderful and make me miss it every day.
And I've never watched a full episode of Law and Order.
@23: I lived in New York for many years and now I live here because I wanted more open spaces. I miss the energy and cultural diversity every day. It's a trade off. Trying to increase Seattle's density would drive many people away from here -- You'd have added the inconveniences of New York without adding all the things that make it wonderful and make me miss it every day.
And I've never watched a full episode of Law and Order.
27
@19 Ohh Michael
Seriously bro go crawl back in a box.
Yes the majority of Seattleites feel that wasy. Just because your minority gets out and votes in transit isn't a sign that they believe in your liberal agenda.
Rather, they simply are tired of how your eco terrorist cabal of friends has constantly kept sensible road projects from expanding the areas vehicle capacity. It is no secret that a vocal minority have managed to stifle progress adding extra lanes throughout the city, and have effectively clogged the citizens into frustration.
That has also effectively limited the business investment, as no employer wants to trap his employees in that downtown mess if they can help it. You only need to look at how outlying communities have sprung up in Lynnwood/Everett, Bellevue, Federal Way, etc to see that industry is relocating places where normal levels of transportation exist. Those communities will continue to grow at a faster clip than Seattle, due to their availability of roads.
Consider yourselves lucky that certain industries continue to put up with dealing with the traffic snarl that is Seattle. One can only hope that the $$$, businesses, and industry in this city begins to wake up to the new reality of better conditions in other closeby locations, and relocates. This will leave plenty of room for your pro density nirvana to become a reality, albeit without the big $$$ fancy corporations providing a form of welfare to fund your pipe dreams.
In the mean time, the rest of us will continue moving out of the downtown mess, thereby turning it into the cheap, dense, downtown slum you so seem to cherish.
Plus it fits in with your socioeconomic class right Michael?
Seriously bro go crawl back in a box.
Yes the majority of Seattleites feel that wasy. Just because your minority gets out and votes in transit isn't a sign that they believe in your liberal agenda.
Rather, they simply are tired of how your eco terrorist cabal of friends has constantly kept sensible road projects from expanding the areas vehicle capacity. It is no secret that a vocal minority have managed to stifle progress adding extra lanes throughout the city, and have effectively clogged the citizens into frustration.
That has also effectively limited the business investment, as no employer wants to trap his employees in that downtown mess if they can help it. You only need to look at how outlying communities have sprung up in Lynnwood/Everett, Bellevue, Federal Way, etc to see that industry is relocating places where normal levels of transportation exist. Those communities will continue to grow at a faster clip than Seattle, due to their availability of roads.
Consider yourselves lucky that certain industries continue to put up with dealing with the traffic snarl that is Seattle. One can only hope that the $$$, businesses, and industry in this city begins to wake up to the new reality of better conditions in other closeby locations, and relocates. This will leave plenty of room for your pro density nirvana to become a reality, albeit without the big $$$ fancy corporations providing a form of welfare to fund your pipe dreams.
In the mean time, the rest of us will continue moving out of the downtown mess, thereby turning it into the cheap, dense, downtown slum you so seem to cherish.
Plus it fits in with your socioeconomic class right Michael?
28
There's a lot more to urban quality of life than just how big (or small) your dwelling is. I live in a small apartment that folks like Jigae @13 would probably call "unlivable". I'm also right next to a major transit hub, and any amenity I could think of (hospital, retail, outdoor recreation, etc.) is within short walking distance. "Quality of life" is about more than how many people live in your neighborhood or the square footage of your home.
29
I think the strangest part of ECB shoplifting and being a certified deadbeat (http://dw.courts.wa.gov/index.cfm?fa=hom…) is how aggressivly she goes after Monica Guzman for using question marks. Really? She has some serious issues....and somehow expects us to take her civically holier-than-thou seriously.
30
New York City can't really even be considered a "good" or "bad" model of dense living. Sure, if you're rich and live in Manhattan (minus Harlem) or the Western edge of Brooklyn, then sure, NYC is a great place to live! But if you live in one of the many shitholes in Queens, the Bronx, or Staten Island (as well as huge swaths of Brooklyn... anyone want to move to Bed-Stuy?) then dense urban life sucks.
31
@23: Let me make my point in a different way -- people TOLERATE New York's density and the living situations that go with it because they are rewarded by unparalleled career opportunity, world-class dining and access to near-infinite cultural events. Some of that is made my possible by density, but much of it is because of New York's reputation as a world-class city, the draw it has for actors and artists (if you can make it here, you can make it anywhere), and the extreme amount of capital flowing through the city.
If you had New York level density in Seattle, people would leave to Portland or Olympia or a million other places, because you would have lost the very thing that makes it special. Increasing public transit and affordable apartment living are good things, but "density" is only good for the benefits it brings.
If you had New York level density in Seattle, people would leave to Portland or Olympia or a million other places, because you would have lost the very thing that makes it special. Increasing public transit and affordable apartment living are good things, but "density" is only good for the benefits it brings.
32
@25 Do you have an ideal solution? Or are you like so many I've read on the SLOG and elsewhere- full of shit, full of critique and offering nothing except much of the same (which everyone has a problem with as well). I'd take critical folks seriously if they had anything else to bring to the table. But what are you going to do? It's Seattle, if it's breathing, it's bitching, if nothing else.
33
Somebody has a court case today, but you won't read about in the Stranger.
Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
34
@32 a solution to what? it sounds like he has provided one....STOP CRAPPY JOURNALISM. Did you not read that?
35
@28: I don't think I've ever lived somewhere with more than 1,000 sq. feet. Currently at 700 with two people. I lived in Bushwick with 4 people in a ~400 sq. foot apartment right before I lived New York. That wasn't an uncommon living situation. That is unsustainable for any long period of time.
You're sort of making my point for me -- Seattle's definitions of density come from a place where a huge apartment (by NYC standards) can be considered small.
I know I'm making assumptions here, but so are you. Based on your description of your living situation, I would guess we're probably basically neighbors.
You're sort of making my point for me -- Seattle's definitions of density come from a place where a huge apartment (by NYC standards) can be considered small.
I know I'm making assumptions here, but so are you. Based on your description of your living situation, I would guess we're probably basically neighbors.
39
@26 for the win
Density is not an end all solution to the problems we are likely to face in the near future.
Instead of focusing density in a very small area of downtown, cap hill etc, we should have a region wide initiative to make the 3 main roads in each suburb "more dense" first.
I guess what I'm trying to say, is that instead of a hub speading outward of density, to instead focus on widening the 3 main roads thru each suburb, (let's say 148th in Bellevue/Redmond, or the entire length of Lake City Way, or 220th in Federal Way, or Rainier in South Seattle)
Let's widen the road lanes 2 lanes in each direction, and then mandate that all future development along those corridors provide underground parking, and be built to 4 stories, and that the tiny shops underneath of condo's model can only make up 25% of any block's development.
In this fashion, you woud immediately spread out any development along long defined spread out stretches of cities, and bring in a model of development that is much more in line with what Vancouver started out as.
I think many folks (myself included) hate the idea of infill density that clogs a small core of a city, eliminating vehicle parking, and infuriating people who don't want to lose their open greenspace, open skyline any further.
By spreading the density along big traffic corridors and combined with keeping 6 lane major corridors intact to accomodate those living several blocks inward from the density, we would go a long ways towards satisfying everyone.
Or so it seems to me...
Density is not an end all solution to the problems we are likely to face in the near future.
Instead of focusing density in a very small area of downtown, cap hill etc, we should have a region wide initiative to make the 3 main roads in each suburb "more dense" first.
I guess what I'm trying to say, is that instead of a hub speading outward of density, to instead focus on widening the 3 main roads thru each suburb, (let's say 148th in Bellevue/Redmond, or the entire length of Lake City Way, or 220th in Federal Way, or Rainier in South Seattle)
Let's widen the road lanes 2 lanes in each direction, and then mandate that all future development along those corridors provide underground parking, and be built to 4 stories, and that the tiny shops underneath of condo's model can only make up 25% of any block's development.
In this fashion, you woud immediately spread out any development along long defined spread out stretches of cities, and bring in a model of development that is much more in line with what Vancouver started out as.
I think many folks (myself included) hate the idea of infill density that clogs a small core of a city, eliminating vehicle parking, and infuriating people who don't want to lose their open greenspace, open skyline any further.
By spreading the density along big traffic corridors and combined with keeping 6 lane major corridors intact to accomodate those living several blocks inward from the density, we would go a long ways towards satisfying everyone.
Or so it seems to me...
40
Please answer the continuous questions about Erica Barnett and her shoplifting. She goes after anyone she wants to with a wanton disregard for the truth and it is printed day after day. Not addressing this story takes the Strangers credibility to a new low. Why not be honest about it. Your self serving reporter is a liar and a thief and should never be trusted by the public again.
41
See, this is why the PI dying ain't so hot.
Now you'll get the neocon loons who were posting on there, hating on Seattle in Seattle's local newspaper, occupying bandwidth on SLOG.
Now you'll get the neocon loons who were posting on there, hating on Seattle in Seattle's local newspaper, occupying bandwidth on SLOG.
43
a MILLION AND A HALF people are coming here in the next 20 years. it's going to get denser or it's going to sprawl.
density is the better option for saving the things you love about the PNW. open space, vistas, clean air, clean water, FARMLAND. if you are so myopic you can't see past your "add more lanes so i can get to boeing from finn hill faster" agenda then nothing will convince you of it.
density is the better option for saving the things you love about the PNW. open space, vistas, clean air, clean water, FARMLAND. if you are so myopic you can't see past your "add more lanes so i can get to boeing from finn hill faster" agenda then nothing will convince you of it.
44
This may not be the right forum for this (though this thread certainly needs it); but perhaps the slog should adopt a comment system similar to Slashdot? Community ranked/rated comments, nested threads etc. Would make rollicking conversations like this one easier to follow...
45
@34 Ohhhh, so the solution to our density problem is "quality journalism" which here means journalism more sympathetic to sprawl and doing nothing. I get it, Fox News rocks this ethos too, the solution to the problems in Iraq are in fact positive spin stories, that's also the solution to the economic issues we're currently confronted with, that and playing the victim and attacking other news outlets for not doing like wise. Just like you! Congrats dickhead you've got it all figured out.
46
@43 Sorry man I don't believe it. No way.
Where are they all going to come from? That statistic is now old and outdated given the downturn in the economy and long(er) term contraction of the overall US economy.
Who would want to move here to get crammed into Western Washington like that?
And even if partially true, THAT is the very problem I have with our lack of insight and forethought into how current planning is progressing with our "leaders". There is simply no way that this region given its foot dragging and resistance to adding highways lane miles, will be able to grow fast enough. YOU SIMPLY CAN'T have that influx of even half that many people, and sustain 1/10 the quality of life we now have.
Just. Can't. Do. It.
Those folks will not consider Seattle as a factor in their lives. Seattle will be such a mess, that everyone will live/work outside of there, in Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, Lynwood, Renton, Federal Way, etc
Noone will want to travel thru the highway mess to get stuck on an island in Seattle. Yes Seattle is an island. If you add 500,000 vehicles to the region's roads, the ensuing gridlock will make Seattle a travel destination to be visited maybe once a month at most. Rather, citizens will live in their own outlying cities, and never go near that shithole.
It's already happening. Just look at the growth of those places above, and go look at the skyscrapers going up in Bellevue, Lynnwood, Federal Way to understand better.
Lack of available roads and traffic gridlock like the Mercer Mess is keeping Seattle from becoming the center of the regions' growth.
Face the facts.
Where are they all going to come from? That statistic is now old and outdated given the downturn in the economy and long(er) term contraction of the overall US economy.
Who would want to move here to get crammed into Western Washington like that?
And even if partially true, THAT is the very problem I have with our lack of insight and forethought into how current planning is progressing with our "leaders". There is simply no way that this region given its foot dragging and resistance to adding highways lane miles, will be able to grow fast enough. YOU SIMPLY CAN'T have that influx of even half that many people, and sustain 1/10 the quality of life we now have.
Just. Can't. Do. It.
Those folks will not consider Seattle as a factor in their lives. Seattle will be such a mess, that everyone will live/work outside of there, in Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, Lynwood, Renton, Federal Way, etc
Noone will want to travel thru the highway mess to get stuck on an island in Seattle. Yes Seattle is an island. If you add 500,000 vehicles to the region's roads, the ensuing gridlock will make Seattle a travel destination to be visited maybe once a month at most. Rather, citizens will live in their own outlying cities, and never go near that shithole.
It's already happening. Just look at the growth of those places above, and go look at the skyscrapers going up in Bellevue, Lynnwood, Federal Way to understand better.
Lack of available roads and traffic gridlock like the Mercer Mess is keeping Seattle from becoming the center of the regions' growth.
Face the facts.
47
@46 I don't get it, if you hate Seattle so much, why don't you leave Seattle urban planning to those that want to live here? Those are the same people who advocate density and maybe alternative to increased highway miles in and around Seattle supplemented with alternative transit. It's apparent you've got a boner for those awesome utopias popping up all over like Federal Way and Lynnwood, move to the suburbs and rant to like minded folks at the mall until gas peaks again and then sit at home bemoaning gas prices and watch TV.
48
@46, I don't know about your commuting habits, but you are completely snowing yourself if you think driving in the centers of Issaquah, Redmond, and Bellevue is any better than in Seattle.
I can't say much about Federal Way or Lynnwood as far as a regular commute goes, but holy sweet jeebus it sucks on Fridays when I try to visit my friends and family in Oly or Everett for the weekend.
I can't say much about Federal Way or Lynnwood as far as a regular commute goes, but holy sweet jeebus it sucks on Fridays when I try to visit my friends and family in Oly or Everett for the weekend.
49
not all of us that live out on the eastside have the attitude of # 46. i like seattle, i don't go there often but it's always nice when i do. i hope that the city can confront growth in a responsible manner. however, i feel that they have too often dropped the ball on such things as light rail, and now the costs are prohibitive. would have been nice to get in the game 30 years ago, eh?
fyi i live in issaquah. my house was built in 1972. my wife works in downtown seattle and i work in north bend so it was a good compromise.
fyi i live in issaquah. my house was built in 1972. my wife works in downtown seattle and i work in north bend so it was a good compromise.
50
@47 I'll tell you why. It is quite simple actually.
Because the outcome of that (lack of) planning affects my life here in the 'burbs. If you realized how cliche' your musing were as to "how" I live, you would realize that your mockery has no actual validity to how I actually do live.
As someone who has lived in multiple big cities, and travelled to work in dozens others, I can tell you that Seattle is one giant mess. I'm simply amazed at the lack of road progress in this shithole. It bothers me, because now that I live here, I have to deal with the fucking mess on a regular basis, and I have come to learn that the fucking mess has to do with the eco liberal terrorists that go out of their way to push their utopian agendas that truly hold this city back. I enjoy being able to go downtown (in most any city but here) and easily travel to my restaurant, find adequate parking, and enjoy the ambiance of fine city dining. That type of experience is really quite difficult to find on any kind of regular basis in Seattle. Other similar sized large cities this is just not the case.
Alternate transit does not interest me in the least, unless it is very convenient and clean. Seattle has neither. You can dream your utopian transit pipe dreams all you want, but this region will simply never have the type of transit you envision or desire. Until such time as I can drive my car to an outlying suburb's park and ride, climb onto a fast U train, experience normal clean sane citizens riding along with me, and get me within 3 blocks of my destination within 20 minutes, I will simply never ride transit.
It is that simple.
All of you pro transit people had better get real on how much of a possibility that scenario is. Until that scenario is acheived, transit is a pipe dream in King county. Period.
You can throw out cute catchphrases that mock my living in a suburb. You have no idea that I live within 15 minutes of work, making a very handsome salary, enjoy a wide and varied social life at my leisure, and generally have a great experience in the area I live. This same type of lifestyle is enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of your fellow citizens in the county. High gas prices simply don't affect me that much. My lifestyle has incorporated shopping, dining, socializing locally, therby minimizing any additional expenses I have living further out in the county.
In return I enjoy large amounts of green space, clean air, safe crime free neighborhoods, high quality schools paid for by my similarly affluent neighbors with me, and a lifestyle that is wholly reminiscent of the way I grew up.
It's too bad you can't see my forest from my trees friend.
More...
Because the outcome of that (lack of) planning affects my life here in the 'burbs. If you realized how cliche' your musing were as to "how" I live, you would realize that your mockery has no actual validity to how I actually do live.
As someone who has lived in multiple big cities, and travelled to work in dozens others, I can tell you that Seattle is one giant mess. I'm simply amazed at the lack of road progress in this shithole. It bothers me, because now that I live here, I have to deal with the fucking mess on a regular basis, and I have come to learn that the fucking mess has to do with the eco liberal terrorists that go out of their way to push their utopian agendas that truly hold this city back. I enjoy being able to go downtown (in most any city but here) and easily travel to my restaurant, find adequate parking, and enjoy the ambiance of fine city dining. That type of experience is really quite difficult to find on any kind of regular basis in Seattle. Other similar sized large cities this is just not the case.
Alternate transit does not interest me in the least, unless it is very convenient and clean. Seattle has neither. You can dream your utopian transit pipe dreams all you want, but this region will simply never have the type of transit you envision or desire. Until such time as I can drive my car to an outlying suburb's park and ride, climb onto a fast U train, experience normal clean sane citizens riding along with me, and get me within 3 blocks of my destination within 20 minutes, I will simply never ride transit.
It is that simple.
All of you pro transit people had better get real on how much of a possibility that scenario is. Until that scenario is acheived, transit is a pipe dream in King county. Period.
You can throw out cute catchphrases that mock my living in a suburb. You have no idea that I live within 15 minutes of work, making a very handsome salary, enjoy a wide and varied social life at my leisure, and generally have a great experience in the area I live. This same type of lifestyle is enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of your fellow citizens in the county. High gas prices simply don't affect me that much. My lifestyle has incorporated shopping, dining, socializing locally, therby minimizing any additional expenses I have living further out in the county.
In return I enjoy large amounts of green space, clean air, safe crime free neighborhoods, high quality schools paid for by my similarly affluent neighbors with me, and a lifestyle that is wholly reminiscent of the way I grew up.
It's too bad you can't see my forest from my trees friend.
51
@44 for the slashdot open source commenting win.
hint - only registered users can mod and metamod.
hint - only registered users can mod and metamod.
53
@50 I can mock your suburban wet dream; I'm from Lynnwood and have, since leaving that shit hole, lived many other places as well. I'm not really sure what awesome cities you've hit up but in my experience every city has obstructionists like you who's ultimate goal (as far as I can determine) is to scream every idea has huge issues until nothing is accomplished and following that, screaming I told you so when things get worse. You make this pretty easy to accomplish when you right off alternative transit for reasons like the trains will be cramped with the unwashed, non-god fearing folk which you apparently despise. Comments like "normal clean sane citizens" make me even more terrified of your white bread utopia because it's based on the fact that you dictate what is normal and if your posts on this blog are any indicator, normal is some pretty horrible shit. As an aside, where are these awesome road-centric cities you've lived in?
54
"Until such time as I can drive my car to an outlying suburb's park and ride, climb onto a fast U train, experience normal clean sane citizens riding along with me, and get me within 3 blocks of my destination within 20 minutes, I will simply never ride transit."
Dude, this does exist. It may not be on a U train, but even in the mid/late 90s when I had my first real summer job (still in high school/living with Eastside parents), I used the Issaquah P&R and got downtown in fewer than 20 minutes AND was dropped off in front of my building. It was actually *faster* than driving myself, because we zoomed along the express lanes and I didn't have to deal with finding and paying for downtown parking. I also never once had a problem with any of the passengers (which I unfortunately cannot say for the 15/18/17 or the any of the 70s).
The commuter express buses are fucking fantastic. Air conditioning! Comfy seats! People who know better than to talk to you while you're trying to nap or read the paper!
I realize you're not interested in anything other than making a classist, spoiled-baby point, but there are lots of options out there for those working in the downtown core.
Dude, this does exist. It may not be on a U train, but even in the mid/late 90s when I had my first real summer job (still in high school/living with Eastside parents), I used the Issaquah P&R and got downtown in fewer than 20 minutes AND was dropped off in front of my building. It was actually *faster* than driving myself, because we zoomed along the express lanes and I didn't have to deal with finding and paying for downtown parking. I also never once had a problem with any of the passengers (which I unfortunately cannot say for the 15/18/17 or the any of the 70s).
The commuter express buses are fucking fantastic. Air conditioning! Comfy seats! People who know better than to talk to you while you're trying to nap or read the paper!
I realize you're not interested in anything other than making a classist, spoiled-baby point, but there are lots of options out there for those working in the downtown core.
55
@45 "so the solution to our density problem is "quality journalism" which here means journalism more sympathetic to sprawl and doing nothing."
Did I say that? You're insinuating that ECB and Feit are the best journalists to cover the issue. not true. So my solution to OUR problem would be to hire a journalist with ethics, one that you can trust, and one that stays away from petty personal venedettas.
And no, you're the one claiming the "density problem." @25 didn't. So you are asking him to solve your imaginary problems.
PS if you think sprawl is still a problem, take a drive out in the suburbs and tell me how many new houses are being built. Have you been following the news? Or just slog? This was an issue 2 years ago.
Did I say that? You're insinuating that ECB and Feit are the best journalists to cover the issue. not true. So my solution to OUR problem would be to hire a journalist with ethics, one that you can trust, and one that stays away from petty personal venedettas.
And no, you're the one claiming the "density problem." @25 didn't. So you are asking him to solve your imaginary problems.
PS if you think sprawl is still a problem, take a drive out in the suburbs and tell me how many new houses are being built. Have you been following the news? Or just slog? This was an issue 2 years ago.
58
@55 He wasn't talking about density? Really?
"While many of us here (new and old-timers alike) want density and transit, the Stranger's unabashed rah-rah for ANY OLD DENSITY, CRAPPY BUILDINGS, and things like HB1490's Transit ADJACENT development shows an absolute LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of the issues, KNEE JERK pile-on, and (as I mentioned before) CRAPPY journalism."
I'm pretty sure the above is referencing density and the reporting regarding solutions related to it. The critique of the reporting is that ECB and her ilk don't understand the real issues and so don't advocate real solutions. Well homeboy seems to be pretty sure on that score, so I'm asking what are the "real" issues and solutions the Stranger folks are missing? Pretty straight forward.
PS: You're totally right, now that Oregon, the Midwest and pretty much the whole damn country are hemorrhaging jobs faster than the Puget Sound no one is going to want to live here and urban planning is no longer an issue. No one is going to build houses ever again, least of all in the suburbs, worrying about growth is so two years ago.
"While many of us here (new and old-timers alike) want density and transit, the Stranger's unabashed rah-rah for ANY OLD DENSITY, CRAPPY BUILDINGS, and things like HB1490's Transit ADJACENT development shows an absolute LACK OF UNDERSTANDING of the issues, KNEE JERK pile-on, and (as I mentioned before) CRAPPY journalism."
I'm pretty sure the above is referencing density and the reporting regarding solutions related to it. The critique of the reporting is that ECB and her ilk don't understand the real issues and so don't advocate real solutions. Well homeboy seems to be pretty sure on that score, so I'm asking what are the "real" issues and solutions the Stranger folks are missing? Pretty straight forward.
PS: You're totally right, now that Oregon, the Midwest and pretty much the whole damn country are hemorrhaging jobs faster than the Puget Sound no one is going to want to live here and urban planning is no longer an issue. No one is going to build houses ever again, least of all in the suburbs, worrying about growth is so two years ago.
59
What about the Lower East Side? Still think that's a shithole?
I'm guessing you haven't been to New York for a while. Bed-Stuy is gentrified.
as well as huge swaths of Brooklyn... anyone want to move to Bed-Stuy
What about the Lower East Side? Still think that's a shithole?
I'm guessing you haven't been to New York for a while. Bed-Stuy is gentrified.
60
Do the anti-density people really want Seattle to turn into LA? Because that's what their policy choices indicate. In the meantime, pro-density people aren't trying to turn Seattle into NYC, they're trying to turn it into Seattle with a bigger population.
And who cares if ECB lifted a bottle of wine? Does that have something to do with Seattle's future?
And who cares if ECB lifted a bottle of wine? Does that have something to do with Seattle's future?
61
@56 I'll stop when you stop tough guy. Regardless, the difference is I am advocating a stance, I was a fan of the recently deceased Transit adjacent development bill, I thought it was at the very least, a start. But many on here knee jerk rant against ECB without bringing anything to the table, and I read this shit on here daily. Everybody seems to have a plan they aren't talking about, but anytime ECB actually advocates one, hers is totally wrong by default and everyone else continues to claim a better solution without details.
62
@59,
Wow, bed-stuy has gotten better? I guess it couldn't have gotten any worse. No, I didn't know, I haven't been to that part of brooklyn in several years... the way it was, though, I didn't think it would EVER improve.
Wow, bed-stuy has gotten better? I guess it couldn't have gotten any worse. No, I didn't know, I haven't been to that part of brooklyn in several years... the way it was, though, I didn't think it would EVER improve.
63
@60 No definitely not.
But that isn't even a close comparison. We are so far away from being anything remotely resembling LA it isn't even logical.
Rather this anti density person isn't so much against density, as much as I'm against the "braintrust" of those thinking they know how it should happen.
We need to quit allowing overt influence from the Sierra Club, Cascade Cycle club and Greenpeace etc etc in our transit decisions. The fact that any roads are an automatic "No" from the start invalidates their participation.
If you really want a happy medium,
First we need to have a firm commitment that all major roads will see expansion for car capacity. Since cars are in use by 90% of the population our goals should be 90% geared towards their interests.
Second, we then need to commit to expanding every major arterial in the city for an extra (vehicle only!) lane of travel in each direction. The city needs to ensure that vehicle traffic is not infringed upon by other special interest groups like bicyclists. We have limited funding for projects, and those that pay gas taxes, license tabs and property taxes have a right to their taxes being used to expand their road options.
I don't for a moment believe that other special interests are helping "reduce congestion", but rather are asking for a piece of the pie they didn't pay for. Mass transit is nice, but the ridership isn't paying for the amount of transit they consume. It is out of balance, and they need to deal with what meager scraps of transit the driving public has graciously offered them, and not whine for better/more. Unless they want their fares to go up another $2 per trip, I'm not giving them another moment of concern. They are not paying their fair share. period.
Third, we need to split King County off from Seattle, and allow Seattle to drown in its own problems. The tax base of the rest of the county is simply fucking sick and tired of funding Seattle's utopia and vice versa for the county. It is readily apparent that Seattle residents don't give a shit about the rest of the county's interests. Let the city residents fund the Viaduct project and Mercer mess. Let Seattle residents fund their own mass transit pipe dreams. I'm sure all you eco hippy urbanites have the salary to fund these massive expensive projects right?
@60 Dwight you'll never get Seattle with a bigger population and not NYC. Seattle can't have a bigger population with all the road problems it has. Transit is a pipe dream that few will want to participate in. Almost everyone who moves in will bring their vehicle centric lifestyle with them. They'll need to have roads to drive in on, congestion they won't want to fight with, and big city crime, filth, and crowding that simply won't suit them. I'm afraid those of you who are used to big city living simply can't comprehend the revulsion those of us who grew up in smaller towns feel when they imagine living inside a densely packed Seattle.
Seattle is as dense as I ever want to see it right now. If it actually had decent roads and parking, I'd live there in a heartbeat. I like many of the things certain neighborhoods have to offer. Unfortunately those neighborhoods are more expensive and affluent, yet they don't come with decent parking, bigger living spaces(Sq footage sucks), attached patio decks that are big enough to host a table, bbq grill, and 4 chairs (or a hottub), and enough adjacent greenspace to attract many similar potential residents like me.
Until such time as the "quality of life" improves, you'll never see me or anyone similar moving into the downtown core. I will put up with a LOT of outlying sprawl, before I'll cave in to moving someplace that feels cramped, dirty, unsafe, and closed in.
There are hundreds of thousands of similar minded folks who refuse to submit to that type of condensed lifestyle, and until all you utopians realize the reality of that statement, you will continue to face resistance from me and my peers.
More...
But that isn't even a close comparison. We are so far away from being anything remotely resembling LA it isn't even logical.
Rather this anti density person isn't so much against density, as much as I'm against the "braintrust" of those thinking they know how it should happen.
We need to quit allowing overt influence from the Sierra Club, Cascade Cycle club and Greenpeace etc etc in our transit decisions. The fact that any roads are an automatic "No" from the start invalidates their participation.
If you really want a happy medium,
First we need to have a firm commitment that all major roads will see expansion for car capacity. Since cars are in use by 90% of the population our goals should be 90% geared towards their interests.
Second, we then need to commit to expanding every major arterial in the city for an extra (vehicle only!) lane of travel in each direction. The city needs to ensure that vehicle traffic is not infringed upon by other special interest groups like bicyclists. We have limited funding for projects, and those that pay gas taxes, license tabs and property taxes have a right to their taxes being used to expand their road options.
I don't for a moment believe that other special interests are helping "reduce congestion", but rather are asking for a piece of the pie they didn't pay for. Mass transit is nice, but the ridership isn't paying for the amount of transit they consume. It is out of balance, and they need to deal with what meager scraps of transit the driving public has graciously offered them, and not whine for better/more. Unless they want their fares to go up another $2 per trip, I'm not giving them another moment of concern. They are not paying their fair share. period.
Third, we need to split King County off from Seattle, and allow Seattle to drown in its own problems. The tax base of the rest of the county is simply fucking sick and tired of funding Seattle's utopia and vice versa for the county. It is readily apparent that Seattle residents don't give a shit about the rest of the county's interests. Let the city residents fund the Viaduct project and Mercer mess. Let Seattle residents fund their own mass transit pipe dreams. I'm sure all you eco hippy urbanites have the salary to fund these massive expensive projects right?
@60 Dwight you'll never get Seattle with a bigger population and not NYC. Seattle can't have a bigger population with all the road problems it has. Transit is a pipe dream that few will want to participate in. Almost everyone who moves in will bring their vehicle centric lifestyle with them. They'll need to have roads to drive in on, congestion they won't want to fight with, and big city crime, filth, and crowding that simply won't suit them. I'm afraid those of you who are used to big city living simply can't comprehend the revulsion those of us who grew up in smaller towns feel when they imagine living inside a densely packed Seattle.
Seattle is as dense as I ever want to see it right now. If it actually had decent roads and parking, I'd live there in a heartbeat. I like many of the things certain neighborhoods have to offer. Unfortunately those neighborhoods are more expensive and affluent, yet they don't come with decent parking, bigger living spaces(Sq footage sucks), attached patio decks that are big enough to host a table, bbq grill, and 4 chairs (or a hottub), and enough adjacent greenspace to attract many similar potential residents like me.
Until such time as the "quality of life" improves, you'll never see me or anyone similar moving into the downtown core. I will put up with a LOT of outlying sprawl, before I'll cave in to moving someplace that feels cramped, dirty, unsafe, and closed in.
There are hundreds of thousands of similar minded folks who refuse to submit to that type of condensed lifestyle, and until all you utopians realize the reality of that statement, you will continue to face resistance from me and my peers.
64
I came from Texas because it's better here, and it's better here because of all those pro-density, eco-nazi-faggot types. Fuck you, Jef, you whiny cuntrag.
Incidentally, I hate the East Coast.
I'll tell you what: there's a cheap house with a big garage and lots of wide, sprawling, awful roads around it waiting for you in the Austin suburbs or maybe Dallas. There are also public schools with no sex ed and creationism creeping into the classrooms. You might also be interested in the anti-gay amendment to the state constitution, from the sound of things, and the continuing lobbying efforts to reinstate the criminalization of sodomy and sex toys! Don't bother looking for transit packages to hate; there aren't any. You can have that, and I'll live up here with all the hippies and fags and users of public transit. Suit you?
Incidentally, I hate the East Coast.
I'll tell you what: there's a cheap house with a big garage and lots of wide, sprawling, awful roads around it waiting for you in the Austin suburbs or maybe Dallas. There are also public schools with no sex ed and creationism creeping into the classrooms. You might also be interested in the anti-gay amendment to the state constitution, from the sound of things, and the continuing lobbying efforts to reinstate the criminalization of sodomy and sex toys! Don't bother looking for transit packages to hate; there aren't any. You can have that, and I'll live up here with all the hippies and fags and users of public transit. Suit you?
66
The problem I have with ECB and her ilk is the way they ignore facts which don't support their ideologies. It's just as egregious when liberals do it as when deceitful bankers partake in it.
@59: SOME of Bed-Stuy in gentrified. Huge swaths of it are still scary ghetto or at least they were in December.
@58: Another article on this site mentions that Washington State's unemployment rates are above the national average. Why are people going to flood here again?
I support good urban planning, public transportation, and the resulting increased density... I just don't support knee-jerk, hair-trigger responses generated from strongly held feelings instead of balanced plans based on well-thought-out analysis of facts.
67
@64: There's a huge continuum between redneck, red state theocracy and an ultra left-wing nanny state. Those aren't the only two choices.
Why do you hate the East Coast? Is this just the Northeast or the whole darn thing?
Why do you hate the East Coast? Is this just the Northeast or the whole darn thing?
68
@14,
Wrong - but thanks for playing.
For those who think that New Yorkers are all cool with gentrification, check out this quote from a member of Stranger faves the Trachtenberg Family Players...
"They also included Rachel Trachtenberg, drummer of the Trachtenberg Family Slideshow Players and former Time Out New York Kids cover girl.
Trachtenberg has her own Wikipedia page, but is apparently unknown to the liveblogger, who identifies her only as "a 14-year-old girl" who told the committee that "Mayor Bloomberg is the worst mayor ever," denouncing him for contributing to George Bush, buying his previous election victories, and economically forcing her family to move from the East Village to Bushwick.
At the close of her oration the balcony "burst into cheers," reports the Times, and "Councilman Alan J. Gerson predicted that the teenager just might be a future politician."
Smart kid, that. I bet she'd agree with Mr. Jaisun, too.
Wrong - but thanks for playing.
For those who think that New Yorkers are all cool with gentrification, check out this quote from a member of Stranger faves the Trachtenberg Family Players...
"They also included Rachel Trachtenberg, drummer of the Trachtenberg Family Slideshow Players and former Time Out New York Kids cover girl.
Trachtenberg has her own Wikipedia page, but is apparently unknown to the liveblogger, who identifies her only as "a 14-year-old girl" who told the committee that "Mayor Bloomberg is the worst mayor ever," denouncing him for contributing to George Bush, buying his previous election victories, and economically forcing her family to move from the East Village to Bushwick.
At the close of her oration the balcony "burst into cheers," reports the Times, and "Councilman Alan J. Gerson predicted that the teenager just might be a future politician."
Smart kid, that. I bet she'd agree with Mr. Jaisun, too.
69
Oh, and @63, of 1.5 million King County residents, about 2/3 of them live outside of the Seattle city limits (which actually strengthens your point).
BTW, within Seattle, about 68% of residents' work trips occur by car (compared to a whopping 2-3% by bike), and that's certainly a clear supermajority in anyone's book.
BTW, within Seattle, about 68% of residents' work trips occur by car (compared to a whopping 2-3% by bike), and that's certainly a clear supermajority in anyone's book.
70
What you pro-density types don't seem to get: a lot of people SUCK, and the more people you cram into a square mile, the more sucky people one has to encounter. Call me shallow, call me simple, call me a suburbanite, but, yes, I like that there are no panhandlers outside my door when I step out in the morning. I like that, if my next-door neighbor is making meth, the distance between our homes reduces the risk that my living room will catch on fire when his kitchen lab explodes. I like that I can park my car in my private garage, close the garage door, and safely enter my home at night. I like that there isn't a methadone clinic and its associated crowds across the street from where I live. I like that I don't hear my neighbor's kids, dogs, televisions and domestic altercations.
If you want to embrace the suckiness of other people in the name of "diversity" or "urban culture", be my guest. Just don't expect me to follow suit.
If you want to embrace the suckiness of other people in the name of "diversity" or "urban culture", be my guest. Just don't expect me to follow suit.
72
I've got to agree with Jigae @26: Trying to increase Seattle's density would drive many people away from here.... And above @31: If you had New York level density in Seattle, people would leave to Portland or Olympia or a million other places...
I mean, I'm afraid if you have a lot of people living here in Seattle, nobody's going to want to live here in Seattle.
Also, I sympathize with the complaint @27 about how it's impossible to commute downtown. Frankly, I think the best way to make downtown a more attractive place to work is to reduce the number of people working downtown. If that doesn't attract more folks to work downtown, I don't know what will.
I mean, I'm afraid if you have a lot of people living here in Seattle, nobody's going to want to live here in Seattle.
Also, I sympathize with the complaint @27 about how it's impossible to commute downtown. Frankly, I think the best way to make downtown a more attractive place to work is to reduce the number of people working downtown. If that doesn't attract more folks to work downtown, I don't know what will.
73
Are you a Yogi Berra fan, by any chance, Cressona?
"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded".
"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded".
74
@66 Yup, I saw that right after I posted, so maybe the flood of humanity is stemmed for now, but I doubt it. People will still move here because it's still a relatively nice place to live despite the complaints raised by the Stranger, Slog commenter’s (myself included) raise. Regardless, all I am asking for is an example of this well reasoned solution, what would it look like? Do we simply let further growth play out uncontrolled and let the developers, builders and road advocacy groups have there way?
75
@63
Your effort to offer a solution to the density problem is commendable, but unfortunately a number of your statements are incorrect.
Most glaringly this: "The city needs to ensure that vehicle traffic is not infringed upon by other special interest groups like bicyclists. We have limited funding for projects, and those that pay gas taxes, license tabs and property taxes have a right to their taxes being used to expand their road options."
Sigh...this argument is so debunked by now that citing it makes the rest of your proposal less credible.
City streets are funded by property taxes. This means everyone who owns or rents a place to live or do business in Seattle pays for the roads whether they use a car to get around the city or not. Sure, remove bottlenecks in the city's roads, but if you want to make them car only, then tax yourself the extra amount necessary to make cars pay their full way.
Your effort to offer a solution to the density problem is commendable, but unfortunately a number of your statements are incorrect.
Most glaringly this: "The city needs to ensure that vehicle traffic is not infringed upon by other special interest groups like bicyclists. We have limited funding for projects, and those that pay gas taxes, license tabs and property taxes have a right to their taxes being used to expand their road options."
Sigh...this argument is so debunked by now that citing it makes the rest of your proposal less credible.
City streets are funded by property taxes. This means everyone who owns or rents a place to live or do business in Seattle pays for the roads whether they use a car to get around the city or not. Sure, remove bottlenecks in the city's roads, but if you want to make them car only, then tax yourself the extra amount necessary to make cars pay their full way.
76
Box?
What "box"?
I used to live in a box?
I'm confused. WTF does that mean?
I'm also a little confused by all the commenters on here who apparently hate The Stranger, hate SLOG, hate your typical, liberal, hipster, pro-density/transit Stranger/Slog reader and hate the editorial viewpoint of The Stranger...
WHY the fuck are you on here? WHY are you reading The Stranger and why are you making stupid comments on Slog? Your dimwitted viewpoints and arguements aren't going to change very many Slogger's minds and it's equally unlikely that your tiny mind is going to be changed...I don't hang out on Fox News websites, or inbred, fundie Christian, racist dumbfuck websites commenting on their articles...I'm smart enough to know, my opinion is NOT going to change any of their minds.
So, get the hint...if you hate Stranger/slog/liberals in general, fuck off, quit reading and commenting and find a more appropriate outlet to vent your crap.
What "box"?
I used to live in a box?
I'm confused. WTF does that mean?
I'm also a little confused by all the commenters on here who apparently hate The Stranger, hate SLOG, hate your typical, liberal, hipster, pro-density/transit Stranger/Slog reader and hate the editorial viewpoint of The Stranger...
WHY the fuck are you on here? WHY are you reading The Stranger and why are you making stupid comments on Slog? Your dimwitted viewpoints and arguements aren't going to change very many Slogger's minds and it's equally unlikely that your tiny mind is going to be changed...I don't hang out on Fox News websites, or inbred, fundie Christian, racist dumbfuck websites commenting on their articles...I'm smart enough to know, my opinion is NOT going to change any of their minds.
So, get the hint...if you hate Stranger/slog/liberals in general, fuck off, quit reading and commenting and find a more appropriate outlet to vent your crap.
77
and I've lived and worked in the 'burbs...the traffic is far worse, congested and irritating in Lynnwood and Bothell and Woodinville and Kirkland and Bellevue than it is in Seattle. And, suburbanites love to bitch about the awful Seattle traffic, but the majority of awful Seattle traffic is caused by suburbanites who invade the city for sports and special events...many of them ONLY come into town at these times so they assume that Seattle traffic is always a snarl...it's not that bad, when you're not around...
78
"Second, we then need to commit to expanding every major arterial in the city for an extra (vehicle only!) lane of travel in each direction."
Hell no. The wider and more car-filled a street is, the more unfriendly the neighborhood is for pedestrians. Pedestrian traffic is what we need to keep our city neighborhoods active and vital. Cars passing through do *nothing* to make the neighborhoods more attractive and nice to live in.
Yes, we need to make it so people can get around the city more easily. But adding more traffic lanes is not the solution. Adding reliable, fast, and useful transit is. But the system we need is years away. Adding more lanes will just add more pollution, drive away pedestrians, and contribute to sprawl and the destruction of true open space.
Hell no. The wider and more car-filled a street is, the more unfriendly the neighborhood is for pedestrians. Pedestrian traffic is what we need to keep our city neighborhoods active and vital. Cars passing through do *nothing* to make the neighborhoods more attractive and nice to live in.
Yes, we need to make it so people can get around the city more easily. But adding more traffic lanes is not the solution. Adding reliable, fast, and useful transit is. But the system we need is years away. Adding more lanes will just add more pollution, drive away pedestrians, and contribute to sprawl and the destruction of true open space.
79
And I will add that I am a Seattleite born and raised, and we do not all agree with Jef Jaisun, who seems in his multitude of letters to various editors to embody much of the self-righteous baby boomer attitude that we are hopefully going to be able to move beyond in the 21st Century.
80
@63. You say you don't want LA, then you say you need a bunch of space around each house and unlimited car access because you want to drive everywhere. A city that works like that is the city of LA.
You act like we (bicyclists and bus riders) don't pay taxes. You are quite wrong.
The Sierra Club and Cascade Bicycle Alliance do not give an automatic "no" to any road project. They call for a happy medium, you are the one with an extremist position.
You act like we (bicyclists and bus riders) don't pay taxes. You are quite wrong.
The Sierra Club and Cascade Bicycle Alliance do not give an automatic "no" to any road project. They call for a happy medium, you are the one with an extremist position.
81
@80 every single poster on this thread has an extremist position, as near as I can tell (pardon me if I missed an actual three dimensional human being amongst all the caricatures). This "discussion" had about as much depth as an episode of G.I. Joe -- lots of cartoons shooting blanks at each other.
82
Yes, by all means we should return to the Seattle of Old, where they burned their trash in their backyards, dumped shit into the sound and Lake Washington was off limits.
The fucking "natives" should shut the fuck up about their shithole of a city. It was the newbies who made this place livable.
The fucking "natives" should shut the fuck up about their shithole of a city. It was the newbies who made this place livable.
84
@Just Sayin'
FUCK YOU. Fuck You and your smug little white-bread fantasy world. You sir are the very picture of The Ugly American. (You're so small minded you don't even need to travel outside of your own locality to achieve this status)
I like cars too. I fix them and restore them but I recognize that they are fundamentally stupid in the context of a city. Also you seem oblivious to the HUGE PUBLIC SUBSIDY that roads and highways have received since WW2. I don't want my tax dollars spent on asphalt anymore to subsidize your lifestyle. From your vehemence toward cyclist, I suspect your need for the automobile goes somewhat deeper - I suspect your are just another pussy validated by their automobile.
Try riding a bike up a hill sometime, Toughguy.
FUCK YOU. Fuck You and your smug little white-bread fantasy world. You sir are the very picture of The Ugly American. (You're so small minded you don't even need to travel outside of your own locality to achieve this status)
I like cars too. I fix them and restore them but I recognize that they are fundamentally stupid in the context of a city. Also you seem oblivious to the HUGE PUBLIC SUBSIDY that roads and highways have received since WW2. I don't want my tax dollars spent on asphalt anymore to subsidize your lifestyle. From your vehemence toward cyclist, I suspect your need for the automobile goes somewhat deeper - I suspect your are just another pussy validated by their automobile.
Try riding a bike up a hill sometime, Toughguy.
85
Can someone please explain to me why these haters (see half of the posts in this thread) read The Stranger in the first place? I've read nearly every issue of this paper (for better or worse) since its inception and its tone has not really changed in 17 years. What kind of reporting are these haters expecting? If you don't like The Stranger's writers then read The Weekly or the ba-jillions of other periodicals available on the web. Or start your own paper. Good luck.
86
@76, @45, @84, .... I like that we've come to a point that if anybody disagrees with the stranger, you must be a neocon, fox lovin, gun toatin "toughguy". Nice work. The world is as black and white as you see it......
89
To #50 and and anyone complaining about the bus: Are you fucking serious? The bus is too gross for you? I'm one of girliest girls out there and I ride the bus all the time with my fellow weird, smelly, crazy citizens without getting my panties in a twist. If you're holding your breath for busloads full of "normal clean sane citizens" then I hope you've anticipated "asphyxiation" as a potential cause of death.
90
@89: The bus here *is* gross compared to public transportation in other places. A subway in New York is much more crowded but people are more aware of their space, the transit is faster and more dependable, and there are far fewer aggressive antisocial people, be they homeless, mentally ill, or just horribly rude.
91
@91 or anyone -
so why are all the buses so gross all the time? is it every route? is it the free ride zone? why all the hobo and hygiene and psychopath troubles?
so why are all the buses so gross all the time? is it every route? is it the free ride zone? why all the hobo and hygiene and psychopath troubles?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (91) RSS