Tim Burgess' City View

The Next Fifty and Free Opera

The Next Fifty celebration at the Seattle Center kicked off last Saturday with great fanfare. This year marks the 50^th anniversary of Seattle’s 1962 World’s Fair and lately there has been a lot of interesting chatter about the history and future of our city. (Check out this letter from the 1962 City Council to the “2,012” City Council.)

The celebrations will continue the next six months and many arts organizations that make their home at the Seattle Center are taking part. On Saturday, May 5, the Seattle Opera is hosting a free HD simulcast in Key Arena for the opening night McCaw Hall performance of Madama Butterfly, the final show of its season. Up to 8,000 tickets are available for what is expected to be the largest live opera audience in Seattle history. Don’t think opera is for you? Read these opera myths debunked on the Seattle Opera Web site.

Keeping Downtown Neighborhoods Attractive and Strong

A couple of weeks ago, I attended a quiet little celebration that highlighted the new residents and new jobs that have sprung up and transformed the South Lake Union neighborhood. About a hundred neighborhood activists, representatives of the area's mega-developer Vulcan, business owners, urban planners, and others reflected on the ten-year conversion of a sleepy, somewhat run down area adjacent to downtown into a thriving, upbeat area with thousands of new residents and jobs.

Danny Westneat wrote about South Lake Union's success in last Sunday's Seattle Times, giving appropriate credit to former Mayor Greg Nickels for his vision and persistence in pushing forward the redevelopment of the area.  David Brewster posted an interesting historical perspective at Crosscut.com last Monday.  (Here's a link to the report that both Westneat and Brewster cite that summarizes what's happened in South Lake Union.)

Brewster, in his Crosscut piece, raises an interesting question about how the success of South Lake Union will impact the downtown core of Seattle.  Frankly, we would do well to accept Brewster's commentary as more of a challenge than a question. We dare not become complacent about our downtown, an area of multiple neighborhoods stretching from Lower Queen Anne to the International District and Pioneer Square and from South Lake Union to First Hill and the Central Waterfront.

An attractive and strong city center doesn't flourish on its own.  It takes determined work and a constant focus on things that matter, like the attractiveness of the pedestrian environment, crime and street disorder, quick and efficient transportation options, and strong businesses. (Continue after the jump for a list of key steps to maintaining an attractive and strong downtown . . .)

Where Visitors Go

In my most recent newsletter about the Council’s proposal to create a Tourism Improvement Area I asked readers where they take out-of-town visitors. The responses were numerous and varied, but the general theme was: Outside!

People love our city’s parks and open spaces, from Gasworks to Green Lake to Volunteer Park to Alki to Seward Park. Each one offers something different. Several highlighted the versatility of the Ballard Locks, which provides hooks for the range of visitors: gardens, engineering works, salmon jumping.

I Can Do Better

Last Wednesday night I attended a meeting of the Queen Anne Community Council to listen to concerns about the closure of the community center gym and game room. (I am Queen Anne resident and chaired the Community Council in the late 1980s.)

When I was explaining how the Council would wrestle with the many hard budget choices we face, I made a statement about how the reduction in community center hours, the loss of the gym and game room and closure of programs in other centers would negatively impact certain neighborhoods. Then I made a mistake. I commented that the centers impacted by the Mayor’s recommendations were mostly in the north end of the city and then suggested the Mayor was “daring the Council to restore the funding for these centers”. I regret those words.

I know that my statement may easily be read as doing exactly what I was criticizing the Mayor for doing—artificially dividing our city. After reflecting upon my remarks Wednesday night, I’ve come to realize my quick and unthoughtful statement represents what I dislike about so much of our public discourse today. I assigned ulterior motives to the Mayor and I apologize for that.

It is far better to engage in a dialogue that focuses on facts, shared goals and the common good. I try to hold myself to this higher standard. Yes, the City faces difficult choices and we will have spirited debates over policy. That is a very good thing. But this episode has reminded me again that our words and how we frame these debates matters a lot.

Big Vote On Downtown Park Boulevard

The Council voted 9-0 yesterday afternoon to create a four-block park boulevard on Bell Street between First and Fifth Avenues.  Read Seattle Times story here. 

This is a very big deal because this park boulevard will (1) improve pedestrian safety in this section of Belltown, one of the highest population density neighborhoods in the city, (2) improve public safety by bringing more people to the expanded sidewalks, and (3) increase our "green zone" in the center city. 

There is discussion underway about similar projects, including along Pike Street from the Market to the Convention Center, along Third Avenue, and perhaps in some outer neighborhoods.  All good ideas to further our goal of making Seattle the most walkable city in the country. 

Alaskan Way Corridor Perspective

In the next few weeks, our region will make critically important decisions about transportation along Seattle's waterfront.  The decisions we make will have huge impact on our economic viability, our quality of life, and our environment.  These are 100-year decisions and require razor sharp objectivity, creativity, and leadership. 

I have four personal criteria that I will use to evaluate the decisions to be made; all four are important and I've listed them here in no particular order.  Will the final decisions . . .

• Enhance, stimulate, and grow our economic diversity—maritime, manufacturing, freight, tourism, and downtown retail and service industries.
• Enhance mobility of people through and in and around our central city—buses, streetcars, vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles.
• Enhance and create new public places—more open space and parks, better sight lines/views, better connections to the waterfront.
• Enhance public safety—create an environment where people are and feel safe 24/7 throughout the downtown district and waterfront.

There are three decision makers:  Governor Gregoire, County Executive Sims, and Mayor Nickels.  At the end of the day, the Governor is the key player here.  She will in fact make the final decision, in my opinion. 

Based on what I've read and heard so far, I favor

Serving the Common Good: Fort Lawton

The Council voted 9-0 this week to submit a plan to the federal government that would allow the city to redevelop the soon-to-be-closed Army reserve base at Fort Lawton adjacent to Discovery Park in the Magnolia neighborhood. If approved by the Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 28 acres of Army property would be used for park land and for up to 216 units of housing, including both market-rate units and a maximum of 85 units dedicated to low-income, formerly homeless individuals.

Some in the Magnolia community have objected to this plan either because they want Fort Lawton incorporated into Discovery Park, because they object to low-income housing in their neighborhood, or because they believe the proposed density of the new development is too high. Others in Magnolia have worked with the city to refine the proposal more to their liking and now support it.       

I've watched the public process carefully, read most all of the plan documents, and listened to hours of public testimony about the proposed plan. The plan we adopted on Monday is a good one. It correctly balances the need for low-income housing with wise development philosophy, resulting in a new mixed neighborhood where nearly two-thirds of new homes will be market-rate. It limits, consistent with city policy, the percentage of extremely low-income units to less than 20% of the Census Block. And, it is socially equitable. Every neighborhood in Seattle needs to do its part to help address our pressing need for   workforce and low-income housing. This plan shows Magnolia is stepping up.

Serving the Common Good: Magnuson Park

Earlier this week, the Council's Parks and Seattle Center Committee voted to recommend two public-private partnerships to the full Council to repair and renovate former U. S. Navy structures at the north end of Magnuson Park in northeast Seattle.

One partnership will allow Arena Sports to renovate Hanger 27 for use as a sports facility and for community meetings. The other partnership will allow repair and renovation of Building 11 (adjacent to Hanger 27) to house Sail Sand Point, other water-related activities, small restaurants, and limited office space. The partnerships guarantee continued public access to the north shore of Lake Washington and provide several public benefits, including youth athletic scholarships and public meeting space. But the greatest public benefit is renovation of the two buildings which otherwise would be boarded up or torn down.       

I strongly support this type of public-private partnership because it allows the city to accomplish what we otherwise couldn't because of limited funds. These partnerships serve the common good by allowing thousands of individuals and families to engage in water-related activities, play indoor sports like soccer and lacrosse year-around or just enjoy a walk along the beach. These partnerships are pro-park, pro-family, and reflect wise stewardship. They will ensure that these facilities can continue to be used for community and recreational use.

The full Council will vote on both of these public-private partnerships next Monday or on October 6.

Parks Levy Sent to Voters

The Council voted 7-0 yesterday to send a Park Levy to city voters on November 4, 2008.  I voted with the majority.  Watch our deliberations and vote at Seattle Channel.  Read Seattle Times story. 

Long Parks Levy Hearing Tonight

I just got home from observing a 5-1/2 hour public meeting of the city's citizens committee reviewing whether to renew the Pro Parks Levy and, if so, what projects to include. 

That's Gary Manca in the black shirt, president of Friends of Seattle, testifying before the committee at the Seattle Center's Lopez room.  The meeting was packed with families supporting more athletic fields for youth soccer, green legacy advocates, representatives of various neighborhoods arguing for their favorite park improvements, and those who want funding for additional park land acquisition. 

The committee is charged with making recommendations to the City Council about whether the current Pro Parks Levy should be continued, for what amount, and for what projects.

I enjoyed listening to citizens present their arguments.  But the committee discussion that followed for three hours was equally informative. 

I personally favor continuing the Levy at an amount somewhere between $120 million and $140 million and putting the proposition to the voters this fall.  I recognize there are others who feel otherwise and generally favor waiting until 2009 or 2010.  The committee will make their recommendations to the Council later this month.