Messy Business
On Monday, August 13, the council adopted new rules giving the city the ability to shut down nightclubs for overcrowding, requiring all clubs to come up with a written security plan, proposing a new nightlife enforcement team, and directing the mayor to propose additional regulations (which, by the way, is how we got into this nightlife morass in the first place). Put off for at least a few weeks: the controversial nightlife license and the new noise ordinance, which must go, bizarrely, through state environmental review. (Any land-use ordinance that differs from the state Department of Ecology's equivalent law must go through environmental review. The noise ordinance does indeed "differ"âbecause the Department of Ecology doesn't regulate noise.) That could add months to the process.
* * *
As part of the downtown upzone it adopted in 2006, the council agreed to spend $200,000 to determine which downtown buildings qualify for landmark status. With that work complete, the council is looking to adopt new rules governing how and when a landmark ruling by the city hearing examiner can be appealed. Currently, if property owners disagree with a ruling, they can appeal it to the hearing examiner; if they're still unhappy, they can take their case to the council.
That's where things get confusing. Under a proposal made by Urban Development and Planning Committee chair Peter Steinbrueck last week, the council could only overturn a ruling by the hearing examiner if there is "substantial evidence" that the examiner's findings were in error. Steinbrueck says his proposal replaces an "arbitrary" standard with a "real basis for review"; business interests, however, argue that it takes away the council's latitude to overturn a hearing examiner ruling that could harm development. "This would make historic preservation trump all other policy considerations," says Ryan Bayne, spokesman for the Downtown Seattle Association. Steinbrueck counters: "The downtown developers got 30 to 40 percent more development capacity [in the form of height increases]. They knew that one of the trade-offs was recognition of our valued historic sites downtown."
* * *
Five years ago, City Investors LLCâthe real-estate arm of Paul Allen's Vulcan Inc.âscooped up 4.5 acres of city-owned land around Mercer Street in South Lake Union. The city sold the property for $20 million, vowing that most of the proceeds would go toward fixing the "Mercer mess."
On Tuesday, August 14, the council's transportation committee took up legislation to condemn and purchase 63 properties in South Lake Union in anticipation of a massive construction project that will turn Mercer Street into a two-way boulevard with paths for pedestrians and cyclists. Among those properties: 30 owned by City Investors, including 13 of the parcels the city sold Vulcan in 2002. The bumbling buyback will likely come at a higher cost to taxpayers. Moreover, many at city hall see the condemnation proposal as premature; the Mercer fix depends on $130 million from the regional roads and transit package on the ballot this November, leading some council staffers to grumble about the council's eagerness to line up properties for condemnation before the money for the Mercer fix is even approved. 
