Forum Replies Created
Thanks for the interesting posts, folks! KS – thanks for pasting some really useful Q&A that I wouldn’t have seen otherwise.
Chris — you’re not being very troll-like! In my opinion, city governance issues are usually less ideological and more practical (although the Seattle City Council loves to poke its nose in other cities’ and countries’ business — tilting at dams, for example), so I’m not as worried about ideology here than at the county and state level, where things are more balanced.
Maybe we just need camera surveillance of the B-G — find out who’s tossing the trash, who’s making off with the carts, who’s riding stolen bikes.
GI, at least one of the zoning changes that led to apodments happened about 5 years ago IIRC. That was where they changed the zoning to allow multi-unit dwellings not to build on-site parking to meet the building’s projected demand, but rather to use on-street parking, even if the necessary number of free spaces were not available in the area.
I believe there were other changes that allowed taller buildings, a “bonus” story on top if the “ground” floor was partly below grade, and so forth. Apodments wouldn’t make sense if they had to pay for their full impacts, or were restricted to traditional low-rise neighborhoods.
gi – That’s only the first stage of the rezone. Once you have multi-units, it’s easy to upzone again to multi-story. The real problem is blindly applying major zoning changes to large areas of the city without testing them first. Last time they did this, we ended up with apodments. Why not try this new scheme in a limited area (part of one or two neighborhoods) first for 5 years, and see if there are major unintended consequences?
In California, apparently some Safeway stores have anti-theft carts with built-in electronic receivers that lock the cart’s wheels once the cart gets too far away from the store. Not sure exactly how they work — maybe they just lock the cart when a signal transmitted from the store gets too weak?07/16/2015 at 10:42 pm in reply to: One (and only?) community meeting on Ballard homeless encampments #81626
VB – I can’t quite tell due to the small photo size, but is your avatar a raptor of some sort (vegan, I have no doubt!)?
Just a side note on zoning for SB: you write “~How about if a developer wants to put a 10-story building next to you?
*Zoning doesn’t allow that in my neighborhood. I checked the zoning before I bought my house.”
It IS important to check zoning before buying, but zoning can and has been changed. The streets in Central Ballard with 4- to 6-story buildings popping up were zoned for 1-3 story buildings until the City changed the zoning during the past 10-15 years. The new proposal to the City is to change all the former single-family zoning to allow multiple units per lot — you may not want that next to your house.
“…were notified about the selected sites just two hours before the city sent out a press release about them. That’s not how you work with community partners, or garner votes. ”
Interesting that besides Mike O’Brien, the other Seattle politician to operate like this was Mayor McGinn, O’Brien’s close political compatriot.
The population of Ballard is about 15,000, with a guess of 10% too young to vote, leaving 13,500 of voting age. At 645 signatures, we’ve got over 4% of Ballard’s voting age population signed on already. Not too shabby. If I were running for office, I’d sure want to be on the good side of 5% of my voters who felt strongly about an issue, especially since primary election turnout is usually quite low — only 31% last year.
GI, I was referring to the specific criteria they used in the search that resulted in the 3 + 4 locations chosen, not the limits in the ordinance from earlier this year.
Marigold, you ask:
1) “This site was chosen because of proximity to services and transit, right? ”
We don’t know. The city has not released the criteria used to pick the sites, nor the list of possible sites.
2) “And because it is city owned as well.” Yes, apparently only city-owned sites were looked at. However, since they need to spend at least $150,000 in removing toxic materials in order to make this site usable, why didn’t they consider renting a better site for 1-2 years? Spending maybe $25,000 a year to rent a site is a lot cheaper, and opens up lots more (likely better) sites as options.
3) “It’s a far better location for actual people to live than an industrial area, is it not? ”
According to the ordinance, the sites are NOT supposed to be in residential areas. This one is right next to a set of townhouses and what most would consider a residential area.
The city needs to be more open about their selection process — please sign the petition to the City Council.
Thanks for setting this up — looks like it’s about 60% toward the goal as of Thursday morning.07/09/2015 at 3:49 am in reply to: our wonderful mayor's proposal for single family homes #81472
Kate, the mayor selected the members of the advisory committee and kept delaying the due date of their report (for a number of months) until it fit with what he wanted it to say.
With all the higher-density rezones of the past decade, Seattle already has the zoning to add at least 50-60% more housing units to the total. The proposals to get rid of single family zoning and on-street parking are there to make things easier for developers, not because of a lack of development potential under current zoning.
It would be great if those of you who attended could post about what you heard. Thanks in advance for your diligence!07/08/2015 at 6:12 am in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81441
GI – you’re right about the greenway on 58th, and I’m happy to admit that my concerns about putting it on that street have turned out to be unfounded.
Regarding teachers, the prevailing attitude in the education establishment is *exactly* that if a student isn’t learning, it’s the teacher’s fault.
I find it sad that proponents of e.g. the Growth Management Act proclaim the necessity of “evidence-based policymaking”, yet bend over backwards to avoid even asking for evidence about homeless services.07/06/2015 at 3:03 am in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81388
Ernie and NW,
My recollection is that the surrounding community, which had worked with the camp leadership, was so fed up with the disruptions and drug-dealing in and next to the camp that they wanted it gone.
This blog posting gives some of the flavor of the situation from a party not directly involved:
Here’s an ST story from about the same time:
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/nickelsville-whatrsquos-the-next-move-for-homeless-camp/07/05/2015 at 1:29 am in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81360
Sorry, you lost me on that last post, GI. However, happy 4th of July to you and all others who visit this forum.
VB – yes (and sorry you’ve been kept up by the “bombers”), I wanted to do a proper job with references and didn’t have time just then. I’m still trying to remember where exactly I read about the approaches and hump construction.
Looking at the photo reproduced at http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=3446 it does indeed seem that the bridge itself (the short section that opens and closes) was built in 1917, but the “approaches”, the roadways connecting the land to the bridge in the middle of the Ship Canal were originally made of wood; our current steel and concrete approaches were built in 1940.
Again, my vague memory is that at the north side, the bridge originally came to ground level near Edith Macefield’s house, but that in the 1940s or 1950s the extra “hump” overpass was built to extend that over Leary Way to smooth the N/S flow of traffic.
All too often, Wikipedia is wrong, and that’s seemingly true in this case. See:
Which reports the “new” Ballard Bridge completion in 1940.
I have some vague memory of reading that perhaps just the approaches (90% of what we think of as “the bridge”) were rebuilt.07/03/2015 at 1:32 am in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81337
GI, you talk about this “time of transition”, but neither SHARE/WHEEL nor Nickelsville tries to assist residents in transitioning. Thus, it’s more accurate to talk of tent cities being “warehousing,” not “transitional”.
In addition, we already saw that the Nickelsville folks lost control of the Nickelsville camp, watched it degenerate into rampant lawlessness, and washed their hands of it. That doesn’t seem like a good track record for any managers I’d like to have in my neighborhood.
Finally, the Market St and Interbay locations are quite close to each other if you walk or bike across the Locks; they’re much closer together than the Market St and 15th Ave locations.07/02/2015 at 8:09 am in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81306
GI, I thought the thread title was clear and accurate — I trust the readers here to know where Ballard is and where Interbay is. :)
While I’m here, I’ll ask you again: given that the last Nickelsville collapsed in a mess of rampant drug-dealing and criminality, why do you think the Nickelsville organization is qualified or able to run one or more of the new camps?
I’ve found that the staff at the Apple store at U Village seem pretty non-partisan about what cell carriers you use your iPhone or iPad with, and should be up-to-date on the details.
My understanding is that both the iPad Mini 3 (the newest one) and iPad Mini 2 have retina displays and use “nano”-sized SIM cards, which you normally get from your cell carrier. Thus, a T-Mobile SIM card contains the unique ID number and info allowing you to connect as a TMobile device.
The Mini 3 has a few extra features (not many from what I can find), mainly the Touch ID fingerprint sensor, and the ability to use the Apple Sim. AFAIK, all devices with SIM cards have some way to insert and remove them, usually a slot on the side with a tiny hole to poke a tiny wire into to “eject” it, or a slot inside if you can take off the back (as in many cell phones). You can change SIMs whenever you want, but it tends to be rarely or never, as with changing cell phone batteries.
Both the Mini2 and Mini3 use the A7 CPU, which has 64-bit capability, so they should run at least the next few versions of iOS fine.
Hey, SA! Sounds like an interesting strategy. I’ve long heard/read many good comments about the Line2 app. On plans, if you get TMobile reception in your locations, they have an add-on tablet data plan that only costs $10/month plus taxes for an amount of data that matches the data your phone plan includes. For example, if your phone plan has 3GB of LTE/high speed data per month, the tablet would get its own 3GB of data for the $10/month.
PS – I think the iPad for ATT should also work with a TMobile SIM, since they’re both GSM networks; my Amazon Kindle was advertised as ATT, but worked fine with a TMobile SIM. Double-check with TMobile or Apple if you go this route, though.06/30/2015 at 10:55 pm in reply to: Mayor Murray puts 2 out of 3 new homeless encampments in Ballard/Interbay #81287
GreatIdea, you claim that “residents of Nickelsville are required to be clean and sober…”. Apparently, you are not aware that Nickelsville’s last location collapsed because of rampant criminality, drug-dealing and other lawlessness. Do you really want that for Ballard?