If a controversial landlord gets his way, sixteen-story residential towers would replace run-down houses in the Roosevelt neighborhood. Developers working with Hugh Sisley, who owns 50 properties hugging Northeast 65th Street, submitted plans in late April to redevelop the dilapidated rentals and boarded-up houses. Today, the city announced it would study the proposal and issue a report on the impacts of increasing the area’s height limit from 40 feet to up to 160 feet.
The area, in many respects, seems ideal for more density: The properties sit from one to three blocks from the future Roosevelt light-rail station, which voters approved last November. But neighbors—conflicted between finally getting rid of blight and the specter of upsetting a quiet neighborhood—say that 16 stories is too tall.
“The largest zoning proposals are truly laughable from our perspective,” says Jim O’Halloran, land-use chair of the Roosevelt Neighborhood Association. “160-foot and 125-foot tall buildings are not even worth talking about.” The group, in the past, has proposed buildings that are only about 40 feet tall, and he expects the group to reassert that 40 feet is the maximum height it will tolerate.
But the neighborhood is in a weak position to play hardball; Sisley may not accept an offer under 85 feet. “He wants the highest and best use,” Jon Breiner, a principal of Roosevelt Development Group, which signed a contract with Sisley to try and develop the properties, said last year. If Sisley, known for being stubborn and aloof to neighborhood concerns, rejects the offer, he could leave the abandoned properties as magnets for vermin and vagrants. Nonetheless, the city’s impact study will likely find unmanageable impacts from the tallest proposed buildings, favoring heights capping out around 85 feet. Here is the area we’re talking about:
O’Halloran says residents may be “willing to contemplate 65 to 85 foot building heights” in exchange for amenities such as building a new park and preserving views of the historic brick face of Roosevelt High School (the white box in the photo next to the football field).
“No one is happy, not Sisley or neighbors, with the current situation, but we aren’t willing to take anything just to change it,” O’Halloran says. “I don’t think a man in his 80s wants to die surveying the squalor.”
The city will hold a meeting to take public comment on what factors it should study (e.g., traffic, parking, shadows, etc.) when considering Sisley’s proposal on June 9. Comments may also be submitted in a letter. Details are here.
Luke: no we shouldn’t.
It wouldn’t hurt, however, to upzone say about 5% of the 75% of the land that is single family zoning.
Hey I’d love to have a single family home with 5 minute walking access to a train station four subway stops from downtown, 13 minutes, woo hoo!!!
Where those train stations are PAID FOR BY SOMEONE ELSE.
You are acting rationally in your self interest. Own it and stop with the sob stories about a changing neighborhood. All you have to do is move to a similar Craftsman house 20 blocks away. But what we did was spend $4 billion on a train line. We can’t move it somewhere else. Why should you capture the benefit of that?
Sisley bought the houses with the expectation that the transit system would build a station at NE 65th and 15th NE. When the “experts” , the merchants , and the people who actually live here agreed that a station further west made sense. The once livable housing was strung with non-code wiring , rotting steps , shared shoddy rooms and a small bathroom for 10 or more people charged $700/month rents . Building inspectors were kept out . Instant slum .
The way you treated people and property in the past is relevant . Seattle has had more than 30 years of this kind of abuse in this area. The area doesn’t need another 99 years of the same.
Please look at some of the new construction in areas that have had zoning “upgrades”. A small fire in one unit would destroy housing for 20 units. We have no design system. George
PC “Why should you capture the benefit of that?”
I’m not sure who you are asking this question. But here’s an answer. The people of the Roosevelt community spent years on an open plan for when the transit route was determined. They asked for transit and agreed to upzone. When the 12th Ave location was selected they spent 2 1/2 years more working on a plan. We the people that live here have a plan to supply the necessary density in places where we the people want it.
We don’t need someone from California, or Spokane or West Seattle dictating where are density should be. Had you been a part of that plan, you would understand it. If you own property in a neighborhood, you should understand that.
The landowner has ruined many Craftsman homes by neglect. This inane plan will ruin many more. That is why planning exists.
R and R Hardware is owned by Hugh Sisley’s Brother, Drake Sisley. Drake also co-owns some of Hugh’s properties. Hugh used to live in the neighborhood, yet did not maintain any of the rentals he owned, whether they were next door to him, or across the street. He slowly corroded the Roosevelt neighborhood with his slum units until Homeowners next door were forced to sell their severely depreciated brick beauties. Seattle Fire/Police Dept. has logged over 100 calls at his dilapidated spectacles over the years. (Drug OD’s, Murders, fires, rapes, gunshots, etc) He got away with breaking city housing codes by making tenants sign a form that they were joining a “club” therefore making them ineligible for protection under the Landlord/tenant laws of Seattle and eliminating his liability. Everyone of his houses have or will eventually implode onto themselves due to the extreme lack of neglect he has shown. Just like a hoarder, there is a sickness to the way Mr. Sisley thinks.