the idea that there will be "excess" funds left over is laughable. all 3 of the other redevelopments were done by the skin of the SHA's teeth. no one's getting rich over there.
If there are excess funds (say, if land prices shoot up), what would they do with the money if Yesler Terrace is already built up? Buy residents diamond chandeliers? @1 is probably right, but if there's money left over, build more low income homes with it.
I thought the problem with Seattle in general was the lack of affordable housing for low income brackets but also those who can't afford $1500 a month in rent (what is claimed to be market rate) but make too much to be considered low income? (The middle wage professionals making in the $50K range a year)
Or is Seattle still bound and determined to let the city consist of the well off and the poor and push everyone else out into the suburbs?
"several" =/= 2.5, which is how far east the footprint of the redevelopment goes.
Honestly, I feel that the "controversy" is highly manufactured. The reality is that the current structures should be condemned. Any expectation that, in this location, low-density housing should be built - basically recreating the current project - is unfortunate, at best. This area is slated for density, as it should be, what with its proximity to downtown and First Hill employers.
That isn't to say that there aren't problems with the redevelopment. Personally, the largest park that is being proposed lacks anything particularly useful to families (we're getting rid of a playground, but not replacing it?), and doesn't exactly have "Seattle Values" written on it (where's the p-patch?).
Further, adding roughly 4,500 new housing units is awesome for density fans, but what conversations and preparations are being done with KC Metro for the increased transit need? Lord knows the 27, 3 and 4 can't handle this size a deluge of potential riders.
It has been interesting to watch the redevelopment project go through the process. And I think it is exciting to consider the prospect of new units of affordable housing for all who need it, not just the poorest of the poor. Should be a fun show.
I just realized that the gorgeous Urban League building is within the east-of-Boren rebuild zone. Please tell me that they're not planning to tear down yet another streetscape linchpin in favor of an affectless Garden City encumbered by set-backs!
@8, I know...I always feel that I'm the only one in that boat, I want to live in Seattle, I work in Seattle but finding an apartment I can afford that isn't a dump is next to impossible.
@4,8,9,10 - The project is creating: 950 units at 80% AMI, 290 units at 60% AMI, 561 replacement units at 30% or less (public housing). They need to squeeze every dime out of the feds and land to do that.
I'd say probably only $125k, which won't buy you a third of a house in Wallingford.
The problem with the mix is that most authorities don't do a full mix and end up subsidizing the richest in our society at the expense of the working poor.
My prediction is that the godawful design atrocity of this project will lead to it being the worst slum in Seattle in fifteen years -- a place where no Somali immigrants, let alone market-rate renters -- will want to set foot in.
5,000 units is an insane scale, regardless of the incomes of the people it houses. Pruitt-Igoe had half that many units and is a fine case study for mismanagement (as well as simply a lack of continuous funding) of such a colossal complex—at the other end of the spectrum, One Rincon Hill, at 700+ mid-to-luxury condo high rise next to the Bay Bridge suffers from similar management and isolation (it's Yelp page is pretty funny), albeit in a more hilarious way.
@17: but YT won't be 5000 units under 1 agency's management. it will be a mixed-income, mixed-ownership development built over decades. the SHA will own & manage some, private developers will own and manage others.
does your critique apply to, say, all the cumulative housing in belltown? that's an analogous situation, not pruitt-igoe.
@18 - ahhh... and that is the major point I missed. My skimming led me to believe this was entirely going to be managed by SHA (SF has built some mixed-income subsidized housing in the last decade, I thought this was going to be a mega-scale version I what I'm used to seeing).
I posted my ignorant two cents because... well, this is the internet. Your explanation makes this look much less terrible.
Is anyone at all bothered by the fact that the City is basically again just selling public lands to private developers? This time, SHA did not even look anywhere else for funding before deciding to go down the normal path of leasing to for-profit development companies. Not to mention the fact that most of the members of the planning commission themselves had to declare some pretty serious conflicts of interest, while still recommending that the project go forward. Here's that list, taken from the bottom of their official recommendation:
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD OF DISCLOSURE & RECUSAL:
- Catherine Benotto disclosed that her firm, Weber Thompson, designs projects and advises clients who might be interested in pursuing development projects at Yesler Terrace.
- Commissioner Luis Borrero disclosed that his firm, DRVE LLC, has a strategic partnership with Heartland, LLC, which is working on the Yesler Terrace project.
- Commissioner Josh Brower disclosed that his firm, Veris Law Group PLLC, represents single and multi family developers throughout the city of Seattle. He added that used to serve on the Advisory Board of Full Life Care (formerly Elderhealth NW), which works closely with SHA to provide housing and adult-day services to people suffering from dementia.
- Commissioner David Cutler recused himself from the discussion and vote on this matter.
- Commissioner Colie Hough Beck disclosed that the firm I work for, HBB, works with SDOT, SPU, Parks, and City Light on projects throughout Seattle. She added that her firm also work for private and public housing developers in Seattle.
- Commissioner Brad Khouri disclosed that his firm, b9 Architects, design single family and multi-family housing throughout Seattle and might in this neighborhood.
- Commissioner Jeanne Krikawa disclosed that she serves on the Yesler Terrace Citizen Review Committee, which will also submit a letter to City Council.
- Commissioner Amalia Leighton disclosed that her firm, SvR Design, is working on the infrastructure for the Yesler Terrace redevelopment project.
- Commissioner Chris Persons disclosed that his organization, Capitol Hill Housing builds affordable housing throughout Seattle and may develop replacement housing or on-site housing for the Yesler redevelopment.
- Commissioner Matt Roewe disclosed that his firm, Via Architecture, works on municipal planning and private development projects throughout Seattle and that he serves on the board of Capitol Hill Housing, which may develop replacement housing or on-site housing for the Yesler redevelopment.
- Commissioner Morgan Shook abstained from the discussion and vote on this matter.
- Commissioner Sarah Snider disclosed that her firm, LMN, does urban design and various types of architectural projects and works for clients who might be interested in pursuing development projects at Yesler Terrace.
No one will ever be happy with whatever they come up with, so they might as well just go ahead and do this. At the end of the day, the buildings are trashed: some of them are already condemned, they are full of lead and asbestos, they're not ADA compliant, they're not well insulated, and they have antiquated electrical, plumbing and heating systems.
If people were really concerned about this, they would have gone to the planning meetings, community meetings and design reviews. But 99% of the people who show up at those things are the chronics and the crazies, and they get all the attention because they scream louder and longer than anyone else. And they make "community input" so very easy to completely disregard.
@16: Yesler Terrace has great views. You could design the most uninspired, depressing, ramshackle buildings in the world at that location and low-income people would flock to them. In fact, that's exactly the situation that exists there right now.
@20 The land is not owned by the city, it is owned by SHA. SHA is not the city. Please make a note of it and direct your irrational hatred in the appropriate direction. I am sure there are people at SHA who would love to hear from you.
@26 Having sat through a thousand of those, I immediately recognized it as public-hearing-hell/business-as-usual. Really, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
amendments 7 & 15 are absurd.
Or is Seattle still bound and determined to let the city consist of the well off and the poor and push everyone else out into the suburbs?
"several" =/= 2.5, which is how far east the footprint of the redevelopment goes.
Honestly, I feel that the "controversy" is highly manufactured. The reality is that the current structures should be condemned. Any expectation that, in this location, low-density housing should be built - basically recreating the current project - is unfortunate, at best. This area is slated for density, as it should be, what with its proximity to downtown and First Hill employers.
That isn't to say that there aren't problems with the redevelopment. Personally, the largest park that is being proposed lacks anything particularly useful to families (we're getting rid of a playground, but not replacing it?), and doesn't exactly have "Seattle Values" written on it (where's the p-patch?).
Further, adding roughly 4,500 new housing units is awesome for density fans, but what conversations and preparations are being done with KC Metro for the increased transit need? Lord knows the 27, 3 and 4 can't handle this size a deluge of potential riders.
It has been interesting to watch the redevelopment project go through the process. And I think it is exciting to consider the prospect of new units of affordable housing for all who need it, not just the poorest of the poor. Should be a fun show.
I'd say probably only $125k, which won't buy you a third of a house in Wallingford.
The problem with the mix is that most authorities don't do a full mix and end up subsidizing the richest in our society at the expense of the working poor.
does your critique apply to, say, all the cumulative housing in belltown? that's an analogous situation, not pruitt-igoe.
I posted my ignorant two cents because... well, this is the internet. Your explanation makes this look much less terrible.
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD OF DISCLOSURE & RECUSAL:
- Catherine Benotto disclosed that her firm, Weber Thompson, designs projects and advises clients who might be interested in pursuing development projects at Yesler Terrace.
- Commissioner Luis Borrero disclosed that his firm, DRVE LLC, has a strategic partnership with Heartland, LLC, which is working on the Yesler Terrace project.
- Commissioner Josh Brower disclosed that his firm, Veris Law Group PLLC, represents single and multi family developers throughout the city of Seattle. He added that used to serve on the Advisory Board of Full Life Care (formerly Elderhealth NW), which works closely with SHA to provide housing and adult-day services to people suffering from dementia.
- Commissioner David Cutler recused himself from the discussion and vote on this matter.
- Commissioner Colie Hough Beck disclosed that the firm I work for, HBB, works with SDOT, SPU, Parks, and City Light on projects throughout Seattle. She added that her firm also work for private and public housing developers in Seattle.
- Commissioner Brad Khouri disclosed that his firm, b9 Architects, design single family and multi-family housing throughout Seattle and might in this neighborhood.
- Commissioner Jeanne Krikawa disclosed that she serves on the Yesler Terrace Citizen Review Committee, which will also submit a letter to City Council.
- Commissioner Amalia Leighton disclosed that her firm, SvR Design, is working on the infrastructure for the Yesler Terrace redevelopment project.
- Commissioner Chris Persons disclosed that his organization, Capitol Hill Housing builds affordable housing throughout Seattle and may develop replacement housing or on-site housing for the Yesler redevelopment.
- Commissioner Matt Roewe disclosed that his firm, Via Architecture, works on municipal planning and private development projects throughout Seattle and that he serves on the board of Capitol Hill Housing, which may develop replacement housing or on-site housing for the Yesler redevelopment.
- Commissioner Morgan Shook abstained from the discussion and vote on this matter.
- Commissioner Sarah Snider disclosed that her firm, LMN, does urban design and various types of architectural projects and works for clients who might be interested in pursuing development projects at Yesler Terrace.
Good. That neighborhood is a fucking eyesore and should be blotted from the middle of the city
If people were really concerned about this, they would have gone to the planning meetings, community meetings and design reviews. But 99% of the people who show up at those things are the chronics and the crazies, and they get all the attention because they scream louder and longer than anyone else. And they make "community input" so very easy to completely disregard.
Someone really needs to scrape the Seattle Channel for our own version.
Well, I'm sold.
@26 Having sat through a thousand of those, I immediately recognized it as public-hearing-hell/business-as-usual. Really, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.