HALA REZONING: City’s top planner thinks you’ve heard a lot about it. Also: Admiral Neighborhood Association chat

Two updates as the city continues collecting comments on proposed rezoning as part of the Mandatory Housing Affordability component of the city’s HALA (Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda) initiative:

CITY’S TOP PLANNER RESPONDS TO REQUEST FOR EXTENSION: The Junction Neighborhood Organization asked for a six-month extension in the current feedback phase of the rezoning process. Here’s the full letter; one of the concerns: How the city did, and didn’t, inform those affected. Today JuNO director RenĂ© Commons received a reply from Office of Planning and Community Development director Sam Assefa, who replied, in part:

… While I recognize that the City can always do more, we have worked conscientiously to offer many opportunities for the neighborhood to learn about HALA and MHA, and to weigh in. With regard to implementing zoning changes that create additional affordable housing, the initial draft maps were released to the public in mid-October last year and have been the subject of significant citywide community engagement and discussion ever since. In West Seattle, we have held at least 7 community meetings to provide information and to collect feedback. We anticipate many additional opportunities for the public to learn about the initial draft proposal, to share their perspectives, to see other alternatives to the initial draft proposal, and to weigh in on how these alternatives respond to the community priorities and concerns. We look forward to additional public meetings, open houses, and design workshops, both across the City and in your neighborhood, as we move forward in 2017.

We also continue to collect online comments at hala.consider.it. Of course, additional public process including environmental review, and City Council public hearings will take place before any zoning changes needed to implement MHA are made.

You can read Assefa’s full reply here. He didn’t elaborate on which meetings he was counting in the mention of 7 in West Seattle; the major city-organized meeting so far was the two-location December 7th “open house,” with the draft maps among a long list of topics on which participants were invited to comment. Meantime, city-organized “community design workshops” are continuing, with one set for The Junction on January 26th, 6-9 pm at the Senior Center of West Seattle. That’s also the location for JuNO’s next meeting, 6:30 pm next Tuesday (January 17th).

ADMIRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: Admiral has its own “community design workshop” set for February 11th (9:30 am-12:30 pm at West Seattle High School) Because of that upcoming event, this past Tuesday’s Admiral Neighborhood Association meeting had HALA rezoning on the agenda, and a bigger crowd than usual, about 40 people.

Deb Barker, a retired land-use planner whose volunteer public-service roles include being president of the Morgan Community Association, came to talk about the rezoning proposal. “It’s nothing that you really want to sit in a chair and have someone preach at you about,” she noted, adding that on first hearing about it, people’s eyes tend to glaze over. But people are hungry to find out more, she continued, mentioning the 130+-person turnout at the neighbors-briefing-neighbors event she and Cindi Barker led in Highland Park back in November (WSB coverage here).

On Tuesday, she asked who in themaudience had heard of HALA; most raised their hands.

“How many remember the 1998 Admiral Residential Urban Village plan?” A few hands went up for that.

“Anybody who’s going to redevelop is going to have to pay into a pot of money that goes to affordable housing” is how she summarized the Mandatory Housing Affordability concept, “the idea up for review right now.”

She also noted that while the draft map for the West Seattle Junction would expand the urban-village boundaries in some areas, that is NOT proposed for the Admiral Residential Urban Village.

Most of this section of Admiral’s meeting, though, was truly a case of “you had to be there” – Barker answered a few questions and then invited everyone over to the counter area in The Sanctuary’s main room for a look at some of the maps that she and Cindi had developed for their Highland Park meeting:

IMG_1811
(Photo by Ted Stevens)

Then she mentioned the December 7th city “open house” that was meant to gather comments. She had developed a page of notes to help people read and comment on the draft maps and offered those again at the Admiral meeting too – find some of the links here. And from there, conversation ensued, all around the maps, and lasted well past the meeting’s projected end time.

WHAT’S NEXT: Along with the Junction and Admiral HALA rezoning “community design workshops” mentioned above, Morgan Junction is supposed to have one too – but the date is off the city calendar, so we’re awaiting word on its fate. Keep an eye on this page.

44 Replies to "HALA REZONING: City's top planner thinks you've heard a lot about it. Also: Admiral Neighborhood Association chat"

  • Mark Schletty January 13, 2017 (9:59 am)

    While it is debatable how much we have heard re hala  upzoning, it is certain that the city has heard nothing about what we think about it. That’s not to say that we haven’t provided comments and feedback, it is just to say that they don’t listen to us, nor do they care what we say or think. Nice try, Mr. Assefa.

    • CMT January 13, 2017 (1:52 pm)

      Office of Planning and Community Development is salivating to get rid of single family zoning so that the houses can be torn down and replaced with apartments as quickly as possible.  They are not going to let a little thing like a negative response by the community or well thought-out alternatives stand in their way.

    • Seattlesold to the highestbidder January 13, 2017 (4:00 pm)

      I was very involved in the feedback process…..at one point.  I finally gave up.  As when dealing with SDOT, even the most valid community concerns were dismissed off hand as not relevant. 

      A group of us in my neighborhood became so fed-up with the phony review meetings  for various projects that  we stopped attending and began a letter writing campaign… this being Seattle that got even less response.  

  • bolo January 13, 2017 (11:51 am)

    That photo makes it look like an awesome board game. Symbolically, it is, I suppose.

  • Seattlesold to the highestbidder January 13, 2017 (1:03 pm)

    Visiting Vancouver BC last week we were struck by how attractive many of
    the newer condos were ( older as well), not just in appearance,
    although pulchritudinous by designed, but in the manner that they
    were situated on any given land parcel.
    Sure BC has the same
    problems with price and supply as Seattle but their approach appears
    more fully thought-out and aesthetically pleasing .
    Seattle has
    razed many of its most welcoming neighborhoods mostly for the dubious
    reason of increasing density .
    Selling off the future for immediate return on a very unpopular social engineering scheme.

  • Ah Clem January 13, 2017 (1:21 pm)

    It’s clear to me that this all pointless process, HALA is just checking off their outreach boxes so they can continue their scheme to drive out middle aged and older middle and lower middle class folks who already have affordable housing and hoped to retire in place.  Pure ageism.

    The only hope for single family homeowners is to unite city wide and bring the corruption and nonsense out into the open.

    Really, tear down lots of existing housing and replace it with expensive stuff only affordable by the technocratti.  Then let the greedy developers buy out of the pitiful 5% affordable units.  Then concentrate them in cheaper neighborhoods rather integrating them into the classy neighborhoods.  Remember the High Point redevelopment?  There will be a lot more of that in the future with reductions in the total number of affordable units.

    Flow the money to figure out what is going on in Seattle.

    • GTK January 13, 2017 (7:02 pm)

      I’m genuinely curious what you mean by your comment. Upzoning in no way forces homeowners to sell and let their homes be torn down. People aren’t being evicted from homes they own. If you want to prevent developers from buying lots and redeveloping at higher density, encourage your neighbors to not sell to developers.

      It’s not like people don’t have a say in who they sell to. The houses in your neighborhood that are being torn down and redeveloped were knowingly sold by the homeowner to a developer.

      And if you want to talk about affordability, look at the current real estate market. A single family home in good condition with updated finishes will easily out-price a modern townhome or condo on a smaller footprint. The only single family homes selling for less than newer homes are either in terrible condition, terrible locations, or both.

      And finally, constricting housing supply is how you shoot yourself in the foot for affordability. All the proof you need of this is the Bay Area of California. NIMBYing any and all densification is how you become San Francisco.

      • Ed Slope January 13, 2017 (8:26 pm)

        Increased property taxes due to upzoning will squeeze current residents – so yes, forced. 

        35% of my neighbors are renting affordable single family homes.

        My modest neighborhood will be razed for $800k town homes with bay, needle and downtown views. Affordable?!

        It’s not about opposing density it’s about selling out middle income single family homeowners and renters. 

        The city could unleash the creativity, flexibility and resources of homeowners through tax incentives and development funds to build density and fill MILs and other structures designed in the character of their neighborhood and family homes but instead the Mayor’s plan pushes profiteering by developers.

        Not to mention that all the affordable new construction that this plan intends to fund will be in the form of projects in Northgate and other cheaper locales instead of integrated into the Junction community and neighborhoods. 

        • Captin January 14, 2017 (7:57 am)

          The mayor tried to loosen single family zoning for more matching character infill such as allowing more duplexes and triplexes. You see a lot of those on Capitol Hill and in the U-district. They look like single family homes. Westneat put that article in the times and the whole city lost their minds!

          • Ed Slope January 14, 2017 (1:21 pm)

            well the mayor hasn’t talked to us since announcing his latest redevelopment plan – because others have rejected at other times it doesn’t mean that we will. but it is for sure we will fight the current plan for all it’s deficiencies, failures, and inequalities. 

      • CMT January 13, 2017 (9:32 pm)

        GTK – Unfortunately, our neighbors to the north are heading toward retirement age and will need to sell to access the equity in their home, i.e, their retirement fund.  I can hardly ask our dear friends to sell to anyone other than the highest offeror.  Our neighbors two and three doors to the south are both elderly.  They feel strongly that they do not want our street rezoned.  However, when they either die or need to move to a different living arrangement (even assuming they have been able to keep up with the increased property taxes resulting from the rezone on their fixed incomes), their estate executors are hardly going to refuse to sell to a very willing developer-purchaser.  And there are the two slightly shabby but affordable rentals that are part of our block street.  I highly doubt the owners are going to accept my “encouragement” not to sell to a developer.  And so the rest of us are now stuck living among ugly, high-priced apartments in what may well become urban blight.

      • Ah Clem January 14, 2017 (7:05 am)

        When single family properties are upzoned, because of redevelopment potential, taxes go up significantly.  This will be problematic for lower middle income homeowners.

        As for not selling out, that is not how things work. Someone will sell because of their personal situation.  The redevelopment spreads like a cancer, since Boone wants to be surrounded and looked upon.  I know of several families in my neighborhood that have sold and moved, since it impossible to comfortably live next to huge apartment that looks down on you.

        • Captin January 14, 2017 (8:00 am)

          There’s also the potential to get a loan and develop yourself. There’s a huge upside there.

          • Ed Slope January 14, 2017 (1:23 pm)

            i thought that was a possibility but ironically my mortgage bank won’t finance my parcel at max use only at current use but the city is planning to tax me for upzone value.  seem fair? it’s a squeeze.

  • CMT January 13, 2017 (1:53 pm)

     What a joke.

  • WS Guy January 13, 2017 (4:32 pm)

    Outreach was terrible and the leaders are not listening.  We need a new Mayor and a new council ASAP.

    • Steve January 13, 2017 (6:12 pm)

      Well with the district voting and “democracy” vouchers, I believe you will probably get even worse candidates running and the incumbents will be elected, since you will have the same choices as the past presidential election, worse or even worse..   The city doesn’t not care and they are just checking the boxes.  Such wonderful leadership that is creating a dump of a city.  This is what happens when the city government only has to cater to the 30 percent who vote.  

  • Ed Slope January 13, 2017 (4:54 pm)

    …brings to mind that old adage: Quality over Quantity. The HALA Open House at Sheby’s (rip) with live in infamy!

    Please personally invite your neighbors to attend the 1.26 meeting. If they aren’t engaged it’s most likely because they aren’t aware. 

  • Ed Slope January 13, 2017 (4:58 pm)

    Is there a neighborhood legal fund setup? I want to contribute and raise!

    • CMT January 13, 2017 (9:08 pm)

      Keep and eye out Ed Slope – I believe there will be.

      • WSB January 13, 2017 (9:36 pm)

        I’ll be writing a separate followup on this, though not tonight, have to catch up on other things.

        But related to item 1, JuNO’s RenĂ© Commons responded to OPCD director Sam Assefa tonight, and he responded right back.

        His response included elaborating on what he considered “seven community meetings” in West Seattle, as mentioned in our excerpt from his first response, above. They included a table at the Farmers’ Market in August and the Department of Neighborhoods’ City Scoop “come answer some questions and have free ice cream” tent during the car-free day on Alki in September. Both were long before the actual draft rezoning plans appeared online in October. Another was the briefing requested by JuNO in November after (as described toward the start of our story about it) the city failed to contact the group with notification of the rezoning plans. The list also counted a “walking tour” that same night – we can’t find any record of a public announcement of anything like that (if you were part of a HALA walking tour in West Seattle, let us know!). And it mentioned “Morgan Junction”; the only MJct meeting so far was the briefing the Morgan Community Association organized and included in its last quarterly meeting, in October, before the draft maps were out. – TR

        • CMT January 13, 2017 (10:07 pm)

          The one and only City-sponsored meeting with respect to the West Seattle Junction rezone was the Shelby’s debacle.  I am not sure who the City is trying to convince that a table at a Farmer’s Market and tent at an Alki festival constitute outreach about something as serious as changing single family neighborhoods to streets full of apartments.  Outreach to whom?  About what?  Who goes to a farmer’s market or a festival to engage with the City about a rezone that they have not even been made aware of?

  • Triangle resident January 13, 2017 (9:02 pm)

    Count me in for the first contribution!

  • Neighbor January 14, 2017 (9:20 am)

    Doesn’t Queen Anne already have a group set up? Aren’t they asking other neighborhoods to join with them to hold this Mayor/developers accountable? 

    Something is very wrong when the majority’s of residents don’t feel as though they are being represented, heard or for that matter  have a good grasp of what exactly is being proposed and to whose benefit.

    • WSB January 14, 2017 (11:28 am)

      You might be thinking of the Queen Anne appeal of the city’s contention that changes in the “backyard cottages” and other “accessory dwelling units” rules didn’t need an environmental assessment.

      https://queenanneappeal.org/

      While it sounds a lot like the HALA MHA proposal, the way the opponents have written about it – it’s NOT the same proposal. (This is the official city page for the backyard-cottage etc. changes.) But as a result of their appeal, the Hearing Examiner ruled that an environmental (traffic, noise, etc., not strictly the ecological components you might consider “environmental”) assessment *should* be done.

      As for HALA MHA rezoning, there IS an environmental assessment in the works and when the draft version is made public, there will be another comment period, so watch for that. – TR

    • Captin January 14, 2017 (1:08 pm)

      Who is the “majority”. The mostly mad people on the WSB? 

  • Meyer January 14, 2017 (9:43 am)

    I’m confused by MHA. Lets say someone lives in an area zoned that 10% of the units have to be affordable. If that person tears down their home and builds a duplex, how can 10% of the units be affordable? Do they round up or down?

  • PigeonRidgeBen January 14, 2017 (11:06 am)

    There is a local employer recruiting talent from around the world, including from housing markets with higher home prices than ours. To incentivize their relocation to Seattle they offer a generous salary and often a signing bonus of a year’s salary or more; say $150,000. This dynamic has made it very difficult for existing residents to compete for housing, rented or owned, single family or multi-family. I certainly understand folks concerns and outrage at seeing the city change around them, see their neighborhood change around them, the character of their street, the livability of their property diminished as their property taxes increase. There is no current topic that brings greater or more consistent frustration to these boards. I do not envy the leadership in the city’s position in working toward the outcomes of affordability this city calls out for while resisting the changes and avoiding the negative impacts that progress is prone to. I read an impassioned post from one of the green space advocates (of which I identify with strongly) outlining the need to preserve a lawn area in volunteer park from museum expansion. My point in mentioning this is that if the city cannot find ways to accommodate the dramatic growth we are subject to that growth will be pushed out of the city center and  into the suburbs and rural areas, urbanizing green areas, increasing commutes and leading to a lower quality of life to fold making even a middle income. I have friends who have moved away from Seattle, people who contributed to the character and culture of this city who are unable to maintain a foothold here. I, personally, would love to own a home near one of the Junctions and enjoy the walkability and transit service, the many public and private amenities. I, personally would be willing to make a compromise away from a single family home and into a multi family situation but when we exercised our great privilege to become homeowners there was nothing in our budget available near California. In fact there was little available beyond our budget. Those conditions persist these 5 years on. Those conditions are brought about in no small part by the social engineering of limits put on the development of housing around the city. I’m by no means a pro business, deregulation advocating libertarian however the extraordinary amount of single family zoning in this and other rapidly growing cities protects established members of the community, not a bad thing in itself, but comes, in my assessment, at the cost of displacing the less established. City leaders and planners must weigh all these different factors and interests, many of whom are underrepresented, global ecology as an example. With all this being said I can’t speak to the efficacy, motivation, and genuineness of outreach efforts to this point. I’m not a city planner myself, I’m a stay at home dad and restaurant server, so I, like most on this thread, cannot offer a solution to the real and true housing crisis the region is in but I do feel it’s important to recognize the challenge we face and the impacts our actions and inaction may have. I also feel that our representatives and leaders are in an unenviable position of not only working towards solutions of difficult problems but also of being the most tangible and available object for frustrated folks’ ire. I believe that this region is guided by values of inclusion, the expansion of benevolence, parity, ecological responsibility and the pursuit of prosperity. I am confident that this community will work towards solutions to this and other situations with these values in heart and mind. Sorry for the lack of paragraphs and general long-windedness. 

    • Captin January 14, 2017 (1:07 pm)

      Well said……

    • Ed Slope January 14, 2017 (1:33 pm)

      That’s the idea! A neighborhood inclusive solution! So far it’s been developer and planner only!  I can only surmise why neighbors have been largely excluded – because we are just seen as ‘in the way.’ The proposed  plan isn’t what current or future residents bargained for, it’s probably better coined the ‘great swindle’.

      The city needs to rethink how they approach problem solving such a complex issue. So far it has been without input from the residents of the neighborhoods in question. The city touts it’s HALA focus group process but there was only one representative form the Junction involved and First Hill residents were involved in representing the Junction. Having lived in both locations, there is a significant difference in planning and development input needed between First Hill and Alaska Junction.

  • CMT January 14, 2017 (1:09 pm)

    Pigeonridgeben:  What a thoughtful and articulate post.  I don’t disagree with many of the issues you raise.  It is your last sentence that, in my view, illustrates the current problem. 

    The City is intentionally no longer working with the various communities to ensure that the growth is appropriately planned for in order to enhance communities and rationally incorporate growth rather than to destroy and displace.  In the last 12 months, the City has de-funded neighborhood councils.  It has adopted a new Comprehensive Plan that guts the very neighborhood plans previously developed by the neighborhoods and adopted by the City.   The City’s purported “outreach” to neighborhoods regarding proposals that will bring massive change are cursory, at best, with no evidence that feedback is actually considered with an eye toward incorporating it moving forward.  In short, our current City government has made a conscious decision to turn its back on the very neighborhoods on which it is seeking to place huge burdens.  

     I DO believe that our community can come up with solutions with the goals and values your post espouses if the City would let us.

     

     

     

     

    • Captin January 14, 2017 (3:12 pm)

      What is the feedback though? “Don’t rezone me, rezone someone else.”? I in no way mean to be aggressive or confrontational. But if the city is going to grow at some point someone’s property is going to have a zoning change. That’s why there is a junction!

      As far as planning; what a complicated process! The reason we don’t have appropriate transit ahead of growth is this same deal. People fighting against it, people for it, people thinking they have a better plan, people that love their cars, people that bike to work. And little real progress. I’m not advocating HALA but at some point a decision to move forward on ANY issue has to be made. It is truly impossible for a city, county, state or federal government to make a single decision without making someone mad.

      • CMT January 14, 2017 (4:40 pm)

        Captin – you have just identified the problem with the lack of proper notice. 

        Residents are in the process of putting together a response/alternative but have not had the appropriate time to do so because of the lack of notice based on the lack of desire by the City to engage the neighborhoods.  Don’t you agree that it is appropriate for the City to consider alternatives that would spare single family neighborhoods if the proposals more sense to accomplish the stated goals?  As I’m sure you have noticed, you and I do this dance on many threads and while you say that you are not in favor of density just for density’s sake, you don’t seem to be willing to consider that better proposals for the WS Junction need not contain rezoning single family areas. 

        • Captin January 14, 2017 (11:28 pm)

          Of course a diverse input of ideas is good. That’s always the course to the best result. (But there will still be people mad about it).But in 20 years we’ll be in the same boat having the same argument again is all I’m saying. My point in a nutshell is at some point it will make sense for some place to get upzoned. Right? Will our population not continue to grow? Was the U district as dense 20 years ago as it is now? I’m not saying now, in 5 years or in 100 years. Im just saying that it is part of change and managing growth. I’m just being devils advocate for the principle in general. I would like to see alternate proposals vs anecdotal nimby stuff, i.e. real mass transit, etc. This city has a lot of topographical, economic, political challenges. We should be working together to tackle these challenges and make a better city for the future. Things like ST3 aren’t perfect but a start albeit decades too late. I don’t want to leave a San Francisco type legacy for my kids. Although they’ll get my house and be good to go unlike many others in their generation that have to live in Mount Vernon and commute to Seattle for $20 an hour. If we aren’t proactive in some way I’ll be rich!!!!! Because I already have 2 houses in WS. They have went up in value like crazy. To the point that I could not buy either of them now. I was fortunate that I was born at a time that I grew to house buying age when it was “affordable”. If we do nothing and become San Fran so be it. I’ll make tons of money in equity and too bad for everyone else behind me. But that’s not me and that’s not how to be a good steward of something more permanent than yourself. This city, “my” house, these streets, will be here long after I’m gone.

          • Cmt January 15, 2017 (10:22 am)

            But just because it might at some point in the future it may make sense to upzone an area does not mean it is appropriate for that to take place now.  To make a such a significant change rezoning an entire area, without appropriate neighborhood input, without considering current alternatives, and without working in conjunction with where the light rail line will go (currently unknown) simply to avoid an argument in 20 years is wasteful.  Just because an upzone may be appropriate does not mean that this broad brush proposal is appropriate.  And it is dismissive and unfair to label genuine concern and appropriate criticism as NIMBY.

          • Captin January 17, 2017 (7:49 am)

            I agree and do not mean to characterize your concern in an unfair way. I meant “nimby” as how the overall tone has sounded to me in general. And yes it may or may not be necessary now. However, it takes time for the mechanisms to be put in place and then things to be built, etc. So even if we rezone tomorrow the change won’t be overnight. It will likely take quite a while for the change to be realized. I like the idea of being ahead of a problem vs reacting when it’s too late.

            I agree that changes made by the city should consider public input. I also would like to see where the proposed light rail station will be and how that would influence the urban village.  I also think the urban village should expand more North and West.

            But like I said before either way I’m good. I already have a house. I have lots of friends that aren’t in the same situation and may never see homeownership in Seattle and I know they aren’t alone. I also have a realative that is a single mom that can barely afford to rent here but it’s where she works and because of her divorce she’s stuck. I’m hoping that we can keep this a good place to live and not turn into San Francisco.

  • Ed Slope January 14, 2017 (2:45 pm)

    On the subject of outreach please attend the upcoming JUNO meeting on 1.19, 6:30pm, West Seattle Senior Center to learn more about the perspective of your neighbors and get informed prior to the city meeting focused on Alaska Junction scheduled for 1.26,6-9pm also planned for the senior center.

    • WSB January 14, 2017 (3:41 pm)

      Ed – I haven’t received an announcement directly from RenĂ© but isn’t the general meeting Tuesday (1/17)?

      • CMT January 14, 2017 (4:27 pm)

        WSB – the regular JuNO meeting is on 1/17 and an additional meeting on 1/19 specifically to educate, inform and prepare residents with respect to the City’s 1/26 workshop.

  • Ah Clem January 14, 2017 (5:06 pm)

    Unless middle class neighborhoods unite in voting out the radical- urbinist junta (Ron Judd’s term) they will all eventually be gone.  Of course places like Medina and Mercer will never have that problem.  The original urban villages were created with a lot of input from the people that would live in or near them.  Now input from the people most affected is totally ignored and ridiculed.

  • WestSeattle Native January 14, 2017 (10:22 pm)

    I lived 2 blocks south of the Junction since 1998, enjoyed the ability to walk to the Junction, drive across the West Seattle Bridge comfortably during my morning commute, felt a sense of community knowing a lot of my neighbors and being able to park my car right in front of my house. It also was such a peaceful place compared to a lot of the dense neighborhoods throughout Seattle. Recently, we sold our house to escape the squeezing out that we felt living so close to the Junction. We did this because, we no longer could come home and find a parking space in front of our house. We would get tickets or warnings from parking enforcement to move our vehicle if it was there for more than 72 hours. (what if we went on a 2 week vacation I asked?)  I was told to ask one of my neighbors to move it for me while I was gone! Really?!  People that actually live in the neighborhood can’t even park  in their own block.  The dagger was when they built this 6 story apartment complex behind our house.  It destroyed our sense of privacy, blocked our view , made us hate living in our old neighborhood.We miss our old house, our old neighbors and the proximity of our kid’s schools being nearby. This is what the politicians and city planners have done to the lifelong residents of West Seattle. Those of you who have moved in from the outside probably can’t comprehend what it means to lose what you have invested in time and money with regards to West Seattle residents (lifelong).

  • Ah Clem January 15, 2017 (7:40 am)

    That’s another sore point.  The city is prioritizing parking enforcement over law enforcement.  You would be lucky to see a patrol car cruising around the junction once a month, yet now you can see the parking minis cruise around twice a day.  Clearly $ trumps public safety.  Property crimes are not a priority.

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann