May 23 G g commented on Four of Nine Seattle City Council Members Are Millionaires.
If you're even sort of approaching retirement age and don't have a $1M net worth (or near it), you're in trouble. I would have more concern about electing someone who has put almost nothing into their retirement account to be making giant investment decisions for the city.
Apr 11 G g commented on That Time When Donald Trump's Grandfather Showed Up in Seattle's Red Light District.
Are you sure it wasn't Friedrich Drumph?
Apr 6 G g commented on Seattle's Weather Is Expected To Break Records Tomorrow, Here's What You Need To Do.
@1 you beat me to it. From the National Weather Service (technically from the Portland WF Office, but same applies -- and my apologies on their behalf for their caps): "ALTHOUGH THIS STRETCH OF SUNNY AND WARM WEATHER IS PLEASANT TO
MOST...IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IT CAN BE DEADLY FOR THOSE WHO
TRY TO COOL OFF IN AREA RIVERS AND LAKES. WATER TEMPERATURES ARE
GENERALLY IN THE 40S...TYPICAL THIS TIME OF YEAR DUE TO SNOWMELT OFF
THE FRESH CASCADE SNOWPACK. SUCH TEMPERATURES CAN CAUSE COLD WATER
SHOCK...AND SEVERAL PEOPLE ARE LOST EACH YEAR IN OUR AREA RIVERS AND
LAKES FOR PRECISELY THIS REASON. THERE IS ADDED CONCERN CONSIDERING
THIS IS SPRING BREAK FOR MANY SCHOOLS IN WASHINGTON...AND IT IS EASY
TO FORGET HOW COLD AND DANGEROUS THE WATER IS WHILE THE WEATHER IS SO
SUNNY AND WARM."
Apr 5 G g commented on Five Ways to Make Sound Transit 3 Better Before Sending it to Voters.
@19 -- (Re: cat's out of the bag and providing a shorter timeline now wouldn't sway voters): I see your point, but there are legitimate reasons for the timeline being so long, and legitimate ways it could be shorter. Voters can understand that we have a long timeline unless we convince the state to allow more sensible financing approaches...and if the state does allow it then we have this new, shorter timeline. It wouldn't smell like B.S. because it wouldn't be B.S., and voters would vote for it.
Apr 4 G g commented on Five Ways to Make Sound Transit 3 Better Before Sending it to Voters.
I will be voting yes, because we need this. But this proposal will go down in flames at the ballot box without providing real hope to the voters that the timeline can be halved (or almost halved). Sound Transit needs to provide an alternate "best-case scenario" timeline alongside their existing conservative one. Just print it right there alongside the current conservative one. Remember, the timeline is so long not because of construction time, but because of financing particulars. So this best-case scenario can assume the following occur: 1) the state loosens the currently super-strict bonding rules (that specifically apply to transit but shouldn't), 2) Local municipalities vote on a supplementary levy to speed up their own projects, 3) the area economy continues to boom and revenues exceed budgeted amounts. So...take 8-10 years off the current estimates for the alternative "glass-half-full" estimate, and ST3 cruises through at the ballot box even if the official estimates are still (almost) as long as they currently are. Then the next step would be to pressure the state, support local levies, and pressure local leaders to cooperate with environmental reviews, etc. Then we can get these done much faster.
More...
Apr 4 G g commented on Five Ways to Make Sound Transit 3 Better Before Sending it to Voters.
@2: Some parking is needed, at least at the terminus of each line, but parking doesn't scale: these lines will have hundreds of thousands of daily commuters, so providing a giant 1000-car garage is just a huge expense that doesn't affect ridership. What will contribute much more to ridership is to allow high density around all of the stations, creating urban villages at the rail stations...even in the 'burbs. And no one wants to live at a 1000-car parking structure.
Mar 25 G g commented on Sound Transit Unveils $50 Billion Light Rail Package Including Lines to Ballard and West Seattle.
According to Sound Transit, construction pace isn't the reason for the crazy-long timeline...funding is. Could any of these help speed it up a bunch?: 1) additional federal grants beyond what's budgeted; 2) if the regional economy or population growth continues to boom and tax revenue exceeds estimates; 3) cities hold separate ballot measures to pay what it would take to speed up their project(s) (obviously without slowing down others). Unless the marketing strategy for passing this ballot measure includes raising voters' hopes that the timeline might be *significantly* faster than proposed, I fear it will not pass. I'm a millennial, and I'll be retiring by the time the Seattle lines are open. I personally will vote for it either way, but FFS provide some hope that it'll get done sooner!
Mar 14 G g commented on This Will Be On The Test.
Right after you learn your weather station plot symbols: http://www.srh.weather.gov/srh/jetstream…
Mar 9 G g commented on Seattle “Progressives” Have a Lesson to Learn from San Francisco.
How about the city chooses some parks (or portions of parks, or useless greenways...I can think of a couple) that could better be served by housing and builds lots of housing. Then sell the properties for huge profit and buy up land (even more land than they developed, because #profit!) in areas that are under-served by parks.
Mar 9 G g commented on Seattle “Progressives” Have a Lesson to Learn from San Francisco.
@2: I don't dispute what you say (except that I don't believe your points preclude @1's point), but I'd like to add that when you provide those 500-units to newcomers (even if it isn't enough to keep pace), that keeps the existing units from having (quite) as much competition and keeps rental rates rising more slowly...for both expensive and affordable (hah! as if that still exists here) units. You're right that cheaper new units would more directly and immediately provide relief, but if we didn't have the expensive new units being rapidly built then all housing units would be more in demand.