Attorney drops appeal of Ballard Avenue hotel

The Ballard Avenue attorney has dropped the appeal to stop the construction of the hotel proposed by the Olympic Athletic Club at 5214 Ballard Ave NW.

Michael Kahrs filed the appeal because of increased traffic the proposed hotel would bring. In the appeal he writes, “Traffic: 20th Ave. NW between Ballard Ave. NW and Leary Ave NW is not an arterial and is not used as such. I am concerned about what street will be used for access to the parking lot.

Today, Kahrs tells us that he and Olympic Athletic Club owner Jim Riggle have agreed to work together to address some of the issues in Downtown Ballard – including traffic and parking.

“I’m pro-business and want to see the economy of Ballard grow and prosper,” said Kahrs. “At the same time the tremendous growth and development of the area has led to some real quality of life issues for those of us who live and work here.”

“Mike and I met and we talked though the issues and his concerns,” said Riggle. “We found that we had more in common than we had realized. We both care deeply about the Ballard community and want to ensure a good quality of life for those who live and work here.”

Riggle and Kahrs plan to meet with Ballard residents and local business owners to better understand the concerns of the community. They’re guessing that traffic, parking and congestion will be high on the list of concerns.

Geeky Swedes

The founders of My Ballard

17 thoughts to “Attorney drops appeal of Ballard Avenue hotel”

  1. If the hotel ownership were savvy, they would market and cater to bicyclists! We all know that they are a vast untapped economic group that would certainly make a bike-friendly hotel a big money maker!

  2. So I’ve gotta ask, did Kahrs try and talk to Riggle before
    filing the lawsuit and wasn’t getting anywhere or did he go straight for the
    lawsuit because that’s what attorneys do?


    I’m guessing the latter but I’d love to be wrong.

  3. I’ll bite. What’s a bike friendly hotel? Is it valet bike parking, a bike rack out front or maybe bike helmet racks in the rooms? 

  4. Now maybe Salmon Bay Gravel/Chamber of “Secrets” will follow suit.  Start working things out like grown ups.  Buy the other one a beer and figure things out, but enough with the ridiculous legal challenges already.

  5. Apparently a bike hotel would only be for guests you can ride to it…good luck getting your suitcase on the Schwiin and riding up from Seatac.

  6. i could swear that when the news of a possible hotel came out, it was mentioned that the area isn’t zoned for such a thing…obviously i’m wrong or has been resolved or re-zoned. anyone?

  7. Maybe some jobs will be created without a freaking stimulous package, for a change. Real construction jobs. Staff to run the hotel, etc, etc. No government positions necessary.  Maybe they could have a goat friendly hotel too.  Yaks are cool too.  Aren’t attorneys cute when they make themselves so important. Got narcissism?

  8. Sarcasm noted, but honestly, any hotel in Ballard would be well-served by having a fleet of loaner bikes. Heck, I’d settle for some additional bike parking on Old Ballard. There’s hardly any, and the city bike rack program is out of money. 

    Or, you know, we could all just drive everywhere. Because that’s really helping the congestion/parking issue.

  9. Oh ok, so hang your bike…what about your suitcase, laptop, carry ons?

    And once you trundle up the stairs with both at Westlake, ya ride ’em up 15th ave? You haven’t really thought this one through have you?

  10. The only type of bike one can take on a plane is a folding bike. If it’s not a folding bike, it’s disassembled in a box. In which case you take a cab.
    I just took the train with a wheeled carry on, a backpack suitcase, a purse as large as my carry-on secured on top. I had a free hand to walk/carry a folding bike even with that. Then I would put my bike on the 15 after taking the elevator from the bunnel.
    I haven’t had a car for 20 years, so I think everything through quite thoroughly, thank you very much.

  11. But I do. I pay sales and property taxes. Not to mention gas and license fees for my 2 cars. 

    Funny (in a tiresome sort of way) how conservatives like yourself (correct me if I’m wrong but your posts have a decidedly right-ring bent) claim to be anti-tax and pro-small government most of the time yet think our city needs to spend time and money collecting a pittance from cyclists that won’t even cover the admin overhead (user fees for cyclists has been tried and then discarded in many other cities for that reason). What’s next, a sidewalk fee for people that prefer to walk?

    Arguing that the businesses should provide the parking might be more intellectually consistent. 

  12. Funny how the name calling and labels come out…….simply make a bike rack that has a fee associated with its usage……….is that a radical and unthinkable idea?

Leave a Reply