VIDEO: With light rail on the way to West Seattle, it’s time to talk about affordable, transit-oriented development near stations

(WSB photo)

Though the locations for West Seattle’s light-rail stations are nowhere near finalized yet, it’s not too soon to start talking about how transit-oriented development (TOD) can ensure there’s affordable housing near them. That was the point of a panel discussion last night, presented by Welcoming West Seattle, whose Matt Hutchins – a local architect and community advocate – was co-moderator. We recorded the entire hour-long discussion on video:

Panelists included two City Councilmembers, District 1’s Lisa Herbold and citywide Position 8’s Teresa Mosqueda (who chairs the council committee that handles housing-related matters), as well as Sound Transit‘s Edward Butterfield, Mercy Housing‘s Bill Rumpf, and Schemata Workgroup architect Marijana Cvenček, with co-moderator Bryce Yadon of Futurewise.

If you’re interested in and/or curious about the topic, you’ll want to watch the whole hour – but we do have some toplines from the event, held at Southwest Youth and Family Services in North Delridge as part of Affordable Housing Week – after the jump:

Questions for the panel were gathered ahead of time via online solicitation, so it wasn’t an audience-open-microphone event, and covered issues and projects outside WS as well as specific to this area.

Butterfield took the first one, regarding transit agencies’ involvement in affordable housing. He explains that ST is “really connected to development in general” and says transit agencies nationwide are. They work in financing and “reducing development costs for these projects.”

Herbold picks up on affordable housing – saying it’s important that housing around stations isn’t only available to the well-off. “One of our larger planning goals is for everybody to live close to where they work … or reduce the costs associated with transportation.” She also is interested in “community preferences,” so that developers can “prioritize residents that would otherwise be displaced.”

Mercy’s Rumpf says they’re working on a Roosevelt light-rail-related project. “We see the win-win … because our residents are heavy users of the transit system.” They try to focus on family-size units, while the “building boom” has been largely studios and one bedrooms. At their Othello project, 40 percent of the people they hired were from nearby, he says.

Mosqueda says affordable housing is a “democratic equalizer.” So “as we create transit hubs we have to realize that” it drives up land costs.

Schemata’s Cvenček says it’s a “more holistic approach” if agencies help address the problem.

ST recently approved an update to its transit-oriented-development policy, Yadon notes. So a question: How is affordable housing ensured and how can people advocate for more of it? Butterfield says, they think about it, talk to the community, when things get going. “When we have some established goals,” they launch their process, including seeing what the developers are proposing. And how do they figure out the discount? The new ST policy starts with a financial assessment of the project. The board determines the amount of the discount. “It’s not a giveaway … we want to tie it to how much benefit is the community getting.” As for advocacy, “really get involved” in the three extensions they’re planning now (including West Seattle/Ballard).

Herbold added that the city’s role includes ensuring that these projects happen. “In some cases, TOD might be a for-profit developer working with a nonprofit; in some cases, it’s just a nonprofit. … The city works hard to make sure these funds are spent” to accomplish goals. She says it’s also important to think about what they need to be planning – even at the early stage at which West Seattle is currently, for example.

Sloan Dawson from ST, sitting in the audience, was also asked to answer. “Property acquisition is going to be a real cost pressure for us” here, he acknowledged, so they will look to partner with public agencies. They will be looking at urban design concepts and configurations for possible station locations, he added.

Herbold asked how much room they’ll need for staging. Dawson said it depends.

Next question: How is Seattle planning for/with small businesses regarding potential displacement near stations? That led Hutchins to point out that a station will be near the site where the event was happening, low density now. How can the city help? Herbold was asked.

Herbold said it would be important to have spaces to which small businesses could return. She in turn asked Butterfield “what kind of community mitigation is part of ST3?”

ST works to keep access open to businesses during construction, he replied.

“Ultimately community advocacy plays the biggest role,” Cvenček said. She talked about a project elsewhere in the region that among other things “will hold a permanent location for (a) Farmers’ Market.”

Mosqueda said the HALA report mentioned lower density in communities facing displacement, and that, she thought, was a mistake. HALA/MHA would replace displaced units, and then some. There would be new places to fill, if there were higher, bigger buildings.

Rumpf talked about Roosevelt neighborhoods taking a year and a half to work through objections.

What are the challenges of financing affordable homes? was the next question. Rumpf said it’s important not to have too much retail activity – “everybody wants a great pedestrian experience but that doesn’t mean four blocks of coffee shops.” Maybe that means residential stoops. Cvenček said that design simplicity is important too. She also said the permitting process in the city remains “cumbersome.” Mosqueda wondered about the problem posed by not enough workers available for all the construction that is in the pipeline – she asked for two ideas on streamlining the permitting process.

“The city is doing its best,” Cvenček allowed. Some suggestions ensued. Rumpf observed that uncertainty is tough. The councilmembers agreed that ensuring all the departments had the same priorities for expediting affordable housing.

Would you support altering zoning of large parcels so more housing could be built? was another question. Hutchins suggested the West Seattle Golf Course might be one example.

Herbold said citizens are very protective of their parkland, and that’s why an initiative passed long ago, saying that if park property was used for some other purpose, an equal amount had to be procured elsewhere. The Parks Department is re-evaluating golf-course use in general, she noted.

Mosqueda suggested that it’s more of a citywide zoning issue – perhaps people should look at maps from the ’30s and see what they showed. She talked about her century-old 8-unit building on Queen Anne as an example of something that couldn’t be built in her neighborhood now but was obviously considered a positive thing back when it was constructed.

In closing, Herbold said West Seattleites should “keep these ideas in your head as we move forward on Sound Transit 3.” Butterfield: “Get involved … we want to hear from you and be sure we’re working with communities and projects to implement successful projects.” Cvenček: “I’m hoping to see more bigger-picture thnking … thknking beyond property lines.” Mosqueda said it’s “significant that on Affordable Housing Week we have just passed a down payment” on fighting homelessness (just as the event began, the mayor sent word she had signed the “head tax” bill). Rumpf: “We have a new building we’re proud of on a ST site in Othello” and offered tours. Hutchins reminded everyone that the District 1 MHA public hearing is coming up June 5th.

60 Replies to "VIDEO: With light rail on the way to West Seattle, it's time to talk about affordable, transit-oriented development near stations"

  • Mark Schletty May 17, 2018 (1:02 pm)

    Just curious. Who/what is “Wecoming West Seattle”? What is their agenda? I ask because they chose Bryce Yadon as a moderator, and he is a paid professional lobbyist for “no parking” buildings. He actively opposes parking in buildings even when the developer wants to include it.
    Also, the city’s stated position that high density development around stations is needed for lower income workers to be able to use the transit, is strange for the areas that will be in urban village HALA areas. To the extent that the development will be done thru HALA requirements, there will be no affordable housing built by the stations. The developers are all going to choose the ridiculously low fee in lieu of provision of units, and the affordable units will be built somewhere else. So, if you want affordable housing by stations, take the land out of the HALA available property and reserve it for for/non-profits who will develop affordable units on site.

    • John May 17, 2018 (1:26 pm)

      Futurewise is who Bryce Yadon lobbies for.  No mention of parking.  

      But everything else looks good to me.

      “For more than 25 years, Futurewise has worked to prevent sprawl in order to protect our State’s resources and make our urban areas livable for and available to all. Founded to help support implementation of the first-in-the-nation Growth Management Act, we focus on preventing the conversion of wildlife habitat, open space, farmland, and working forests to subdivisions and development, while directing most growth into our urbanized areas.  Our mission also incorporates an important focus on livability, housing, transportation, social justice, environmental justice and environmental quality in our urbanized areas.”

      • Mark Schletty May 17, 2018 (2:04 pm)

        A point of reference for my Yadon parking involvement comment.  Check earlier WSB article about Jack Miller’ proposed development in the Junction and Yadon’s attack on the parking being allowed. Even went so far as to use social media to try to recruit others to his aid in opposing  Miller’s proposed parking for tenants and businesses. That is why I raise concerns when he is in a leadership role on future West Seattle housing issues.  Futurewise’s other good intentions not-with-standing.

        • KM May 17, 2018 (3:48 pm)

          He used social media for this?!? Outrageous!! I never use the internet to garner support for any issues I care about!

        • Chemist May 17, 2018 (4:35 pm)

          I think these “welcoming” groups are pro-development organizing groups meant to “stir local, neighborhood conversation” and also rally supporters to their causes.  The Welcoming West Seattle group is new to me, but appears to have launched on Facebook a bit over a year ago and seems to post to rally like-minded supporters.  They even were welcomed by “Welcoming Wallingford”.

          I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s about new faces for development lobbying like a younger group of Roger Valdezes.

          Angela Compton was at many of the PLUZ committee meetings a few months ago stating her position as an advocate with Futurewise.

          I like this one recruiting people without background or discussion of the what the issue is, since I’ve also read about issues with larger wood-frame construction and it being less fire resistant for commercial properties.

          These folks are a part of the community, I guess, but I’d feel a lot better about reducing our parking requirements for urban developments if our RPZ permits similarly were reduced for folks who inhabit developments that take advantage of not building parking.  Consider it a “put your money where your mouth is” response where a TOD of 50 units with no parking spaces only can have 25 RPZ permits issued to residents.

          • John May 18, 2018 (11:47 am)


            The answer to all the parking issues is plain and simple.  Unfortunately it is not tenable to those who are here first and claimed their “rights” to street parking.  

            Simply charge for all street parking.  Monetizing street parking would level the playing field and be fair to all.

            I was born and raised in West Seattle in the days when people actually parked their cars in their garages or driveways.  Most people did not have multiple cars, boats and rec vehicles.  Currently it seems few people utilize their own property for storing vehicles with more and more relying on street parking because it is free. 

            Should the same rules apply to all?  Should people that choose not to park on their own property be given a pass, but the new arrivals be charged for the same street access?

          • Chemist May 18, 2018 (4:57 pm)

            John, I live on a corner and have both spaces of our off-street garage filled with vehicles.  We’re net contributor to the street parking availability by pretty much every measure.  The issue is with a level of residential density where street parking becomes much more constrained (there are areas of Capitol Hill where RPZs are so overissued they don’t really help much).  I’d suggest a scarce resource allocation scheme based on taxable land parcel size and if that parcel has off-street parking or not.  If an address of 5000 sq ft has 2 off-street parking spots in a garage, then that address should be permitted fewer RPZ passes than the 5000 sq ft address built in the 1900s with no off-street parking with no garage.  I’d also support “tiers” where identical 3 br homes get a low rate on the first RPZ pass and successively higher rates for the 2nd or 3rd RPZ pass issued.

  • psps May 17, 2018 (1:56 pm)

    LOL. It will be a collection of buildings just like Elwood’s apartment building, which was also next to “light rail.”

  • Justme May 17, 2018 (2:02 pm)

    I can’t wait to see what “affordable” means.

    • Swede. May 17, 2018 (2:54 pm)

      About half the average annual monthly income in rent, since the average for ‘new’ Seattle is much higher that will look ‘affordable’ on paper. 

      Since all apartments buildings are running daily checks for rent around them to maximize profit (‘free market’ you know…) it won’t be less than now. However rent have (supposedly) stopped going up for some months now. Think it is because, partly, lots of apartments been finished and are available and that people been starting complaining about the ridiculous high rents. 

    • My two cents ... May 17, 2018 (6:06 pm)

      @justme —- If Herbold has her way, someone will have an additional tax burden to pay for it.

    • Concerned May 17, 2018 (6:16 pm)

      Exactly, “Affordable” seems to be the buzz word lately, but how is that actually defined? 

  • Wes C. Addle May 17, 2018 (2:15 pm)

    I remember that guy from a thread last year trying to pretend he was a local resident and then someone called him out for being a lobbyist LOL

  • Amy May 17, 2018 (2:16 pm)

    As someone who lives where bus transit is impossible (over a mile to the nearest bus stops to my house), I really hope they’re going to include parking and park and ride options in their light rail plan.  I have to say I’m tired of drivers being penalized for needing parking.  I do what I can to reduce my traffic profile, but if I can’t park near to transit, then using light rail is going to be impossible!

    • WSB May 17, 2018 (2:31 pm)

      I can tell you right now, no park-and-rides in the city. That wouldn’t necessarily stop a private developer from something of the like, but it won’t be part of any in-city station, that’s been made very clear.

      • carole May 17, 2018 (3:22 pm)

        There is a park n ride at the Northgate Transit Center and that is within city limits.

        • WSB May 17, 2018 (3:26 pm)

          Recently built?

          • carole May 17, 2018 (4:01 pm)

            Been there for years. June 1992.

    • John May 17, 2018 (2:52 pm)


      Can you share your neighborhood?

       I ask because I am unaware of any such ‘transit desert’ with more than 1 mile  from a house to a bus stop in West Seattle.  

      • D Del Rio May 17, 2018 (3:20 pm)

        I am not Amy, but I live in Arbor Heights, and Metro took away the 21 and rerouted it to Westwood Village instead. There is a 21 express, but that only runs during morning and evening rush hours. We do have the 22 that runs a very limited schedule that can take you to Westwood to transfer to a downtown . If you live deep into Arbor Heights, it is almost like having no reliable transit at all. So yes, there are transit deserts in Seattle. Once they brought in Rapid Ride, a lot of bus routes were either downsized or eliminated. If it is too late in the evening, there is no way that a large chunk of Arbor Heights would be able to take Metro to a destination. So yes, there are bus stops, but no buses that run on a regular basis.

        • John May 17, 2018 (3:48 pm)

          D Del Rio,

          The claim is not about schedule, but about distance.

          I still can’t think of an area in West Seattle including Arbor Heights with a mile+ distance to a bus stop.

          • Mickymse May 18, 2018 (10:57 am)

            Yes. And Arbor Heights residents had opportunities to make public comment about transit changes, and those who showed up were clear that they preferred to choose less frequency in order to maintain direct bus connections to Downtown rather than buses coming MORE often but requiring a transfer to get Downtown.

    • John May 17, 2018 (3:32 pm)

      De jure park and rides exist in West Seattle virtually everywhere convenient to bus and ferry due to our free street parking.

    • Peter L. May 17, 2018 (3:39 pm)

      I agree. I used to be vehemently against park and rides (and hide and riders) until moved where the only bus option is the reliably unreliable route 21 (granted, that was my own mistake). Now I’ve reversed my position. Other areas have it worse than I do; there are huge swaths of Gatewood, Arbor Heights, Seaview, Beach Drive, Harbor Drive, etc., that have very limited transit service or none at all. The city and county policies against park and rides in the city are wrong, and those policies make transit inaccessible for tens of thousands of people in West Seattle. I really don’t understand the “logic” of forcing people to be car commuters instead of providing access to transit. If there are not going to be park and rides, then we need a massive expansion of bus service. And that’s the case right now, not just pertaining to light rail. 

      • KM May 17, 2018 (6:13 pm)

        What huge swath of Gatewood? The C line, 21 and 22 all pass through that neighborhood at different points, and it’s not that big of a neighborhood.

        I really wish our waterfront roadways had much much MUCH better transit access.

    • CAM May 18, 2018 (1:03 pm)

      I always find it interesting that when people complain that they don’t take public transit because it isn’t accessible to them that they then make the argument for parking garages in densely populated urban hubs rather than the more logical approach of arguing for more transit near their home. I don’t think anyone would disagree with the need for a more expansive and accessible bus/rail system but you will get a lot more disagreement when you argue that valuable land should be converted into a place for storing vehicles. Maybe we could all work together to advocate for more buses in those areas that are not served as well? Maybe that is something to start talking about now to ensure that all neighborhoods have easy bus access to the light rail when it is built? Let’s talk about a plan that everyone can get on board with rather than arguing about whether or not public money should pay for private vehicle storage. 

  • HappyDriver May 17, 2018 (3:34 pm)

    John. The 37 run’s just 3 times in the morning to downtown on Beach Drive. The 57 only runs 3 times in the morning  downtown on Genesee Hill . Anybody that lives south of Admiral or west of California has to walk. There are a lot of people living a mile, or more from a bus. 

    • John May 17, 2018 (4:32 pm)


      Without disputing the schedules you cite, consulting maps confirms that none of those areas are greater than 1 mile from a bus stop as claimed.

      • Ws prayes May 18, 2018 (12:32 am)

        Bet it feels like over an hour!! Those hills!!I have a friend I avoid visiting on the 37 route in the valley of WS…ugh have u ever tried walking to the bus stop from these areas? Not good

      • Maria May 18, 2018 (5:05 am)


        Please try common sense in understanding what people are trying to say rather than being a stickler to their words.  You sway no one with that approach.

        They are talking about the challenges of accessing the system to meet their needs.

        • John May 18, 2018 (11:53 am)

          Maria common sense comes into play when people use false statements to support their arguments.  

          Several here have noted the scheduling of transit accurately.  This is a common sense point that is not in dispute. 

          Virtually everyone has common sense complaints about transit service as well as accessing their unique needs and desires for effortless travel.

          Making up false facts is different from common sense.

          • Wseattlite May 18, 2018 (10:17 pm)

            John, a bus is only a bus stop when busses actually stop there.  Call it whatever you want, but without busses arriving and leaving it is of no use for transit.  That happens on several lines in West Seattle where the limited schedules do not meet the transiting commuters needs.  This is kindergarten logic.  

  • HappyDriver May 17, 2018 (3:38 pm)

    Doesn’t Bryce Yeadon live south of here? Not even a West Seattle or White Center resident. I have no faith in his opinions. As others have said-what is “affordable”  

    • WSB May 17, 2018 (3:44 pm)

      He described himself in the aforementioned comment thread as a West Seattle resident. Anyway, this event wasn’t about his opinions (even if you don’t watch it, you can see that in the text). It was Q&A with councilmembers and various people of interest in the space. This will be a topic with light rail coming and like many other things is better discussed sooner rather than later.

  • Mrs Shaw May 17, 2018 (4:44 pm)

    Bryce worked for Mark Miloscia, so I’d  imagine he’s a Federal Way resident. 

  • Jort May 17, 2018 (4:54 pm)

    As everybody knows, the great successes of the world’s finest subway and transit systems is that they are all focused on providing lots of parking for cars.

    Any trip to New York, Paris, Tokyo, London — just outside of every station you will find a gigantic, multi-million dollar parking garage. It’s what makes these cities so appealing and is obviously a key component of a successful major public transportation system.

    Indeed, Paris would not be what we think of today unless the city planners had the foresight to force landowners to build thousands of parking spots at every metro station. And just LOOK at how EASY it is to park in Paris, now!!??!! 

    • Mike May 17, 2018 (6:27 pm)

      Ya, I heard Europe banned all cars, uses unicorn farts for fuel and everyone lives in Kensington Palace next to Kensington Station. Let’s think about how anyone in West Seattle would attempt to walk 3 miles, with hills, to get to ONE station.  The Tube has numerous lines and stations that are all interconnected by flat streets and massive sidewalks.  Even with tons of cars and busses, it’s easier to walk miles in London than from the Space Needle to the stadiums, much less a penninsula called West Seattle.

      • HappyCamper May 17, 2018 (8:34 pm)

        That’s because no one planned for the future here because it has always been about cars because our country and cities were new enough to not worry about it.

        Cars are great but it couldn’t hurt to start planning for when the city has doubled in population in 50 years and we still have the same road capacity.

        • Mike May 18, 2018 (7:04 am)

          That’s because no one planned for the future here because it has always been about cars”  I’ll give you a little more insight.  Planning is always 20 years behind the need and it’s always a political fight that typically ends with millions spent on studies and no action.  That tunnel that’s almost done, the initial plans started in the early 90s.  We once had a light rail plan in Seattle and land was purchased, businesses shut down and then the government decided to not build it, so they resold the properties.

          Unless you have a way to get to the mass transit station, it’s POINTLESS!

          • HappyCamper May 18, 2018 (12:32 pm)

            Planning is always 20 years behind? Because people fight being pro-active. That’s the problem. I would bet almost everyone is in agreement that great mass transit would be awesome. Instead we bicker and study and do nothing. So should we wait 20 years to plan for 20 years from now?

            Let’s do like forward thrust and just abandon it altogether. I’m sure Atlanta thanks us for that one.

            Forward Thrust should have been done. SF zones in Urban Villages should have been upzoned when UV’s were created. Now we’re 40+ and 20+ years behind respectively.

  • 1994 May 17, 2018 (6:00 pm)

    2014 IRS tax filing reveals in Seattle 51% of filers had an adjusted gross income of under $50,000.

    What does affordable housing look like for these people? 30% of their income?

    Who will  be subsidizing housing expenses to make it affordable?

  • TJ May 17, 2018 (6:45 pm)

    Jort’s anti-car rants make it seem as though he is a lobbyst for Futurewise as well? That groups purpose as quoted by John above are almost identical to UN Agenda 21, which is a lobby to influence nations to severely limit sprawl (and therefore kill the American dream of home ownership by killing developments) and car use. We shouldn’t look at cities in other countries to model ourselves after as that has no relevance to the American way, and New York built subways before there were even cars. Ignoring the fact that most people need cars to get around, even just in West Seattle, is ignorant

    • HappyCamper May 17, 2018 (8:30 pm)

      IMHO “The American Dream” could use a little updating. I am not anti car and drive by myself to work (it is electric), see the value in cars and in parking. With all due respect the American dream is a marketing term and is more about perspective than anything else. Pollution is bad, sprawl is bad. In the 70’s or whatever we didn’t know better but now we do.

      We should be looking at information and choices as an opportunity to improve not as an impediment to happiness.

    • Jort May 17, 2018 (10:08 pm)

      So wait, “developers” in cities are bad, but “developments” in suburbia are the American Dream? Oh, cool, makes total sense.

      Oh, also … i, too, saw the headline on Breitbart: 

      AGENDA 21!!!!!! UN AGENDA 21!!!!!!! OOOGA BOOOGA! 

      • HappyCamper May 18, 2018 (5:57 am)

        Good point Jort. There’s a lot of logical flaws on here with regard to zoning, etc. The American ego floors me. I think this country is great and don’t want to live anywhere else. But the rest of the developed world can’t all be morons! 

  • Matt Hutchins May 18, 2018 (5:26 am)
    Who is Welcoming West Seattle?
    We are a group of neighbors in West Seattle interested in a community that supports inclusion, diversity, social equity, and sustainable growth in West Seattle.  We’re renters, homeowners, and business owners. Some of us are new to West Seattle while others have called this place our home for decades.
    As I said in the video, change is coming to West Seattle, and we’ll like to make it for the best-leveraging a positive vision for the future of our neighborhoods into investments in transit, open space, and affordable housing.
    If you love West Seattle, think West Seattle should welcome our new neighbors and forge a great future together, then join us over on Facebook by searching for ‘@WelcomingWestSeattle’.  
    • Chemist May 18, 2018 (9:25 pm)

      and are you funded by Seattle 4 Everyone/Futurewise?

      • matt hutchins May 18, 2018 (10:08 pm)

        We’re not funded by any organization, in fact, not funded at all.  its a bunch a neighbors that have come together to put forth a optomistic, inclusive vision of West Seattle. 

        You’re welcome to join us over on Facebook! 

        • Chemist May 19, 2018 (2:21 pm)

          I saw you’re an admin for West Seattle for Everyone on Facebook, along with Seattle for Everyone.  Unfortunately, it’s closed.  Can I join that too, since I’m a neighbor of the West Seattle junction too?

          • Matt hutchins May 19, 2018 (9:52 pm)

            Go over to Facebook and ask to join, just like any other Facebook group.  

            Welcoming West Seattle is an open group and you could join there too while you are at it!   


  • CMT May 18, 2018 (9:24 am)

    Welcoming newcomers and planning for inevitable change are worthy goals.  Please also remember to value the residents that already live here and have contributed greatly to building the community rather than treating them as an impediment to a new vision that treats them as negligible.

    • Helpful May 18, 2018 (11:50 am)


    • KM May 18, 2018 (12:14 pm)

      It’s not newcomers (them) vs. longtimers (me, you). Lots of longtimers are embracing upcoming changes. 

      • CMT May 18, 2018 (2:49 pm)

        As I said, welcoming newcomers and planning for change are worthy goals . . . 

        • sigh May 18, 2018 (4:33 pm)

          You pretty clearly set up a dichotomy between newcomers and long-timers in your original post.  

          And I’m with KM–it’s a false dichotomy in that tons of WS born and raised folks are clamoring for better transit and more housing (and of course plenty of new arrivals don’t want anyone else coming here, don’t care about transit, etc.).

          • CMT May 18, 2018 (6:03 pm)

            If asking for both existing residents and newcomers to be valued is a dichotomy, I’m not seeing it.

  • Question Mark May 18, 2018 (2:02 pm)

    By the time light rail is functioning in West Seattle, you’ll probably be able to hail a driverless ride to the nearest station any time you want, right … ?? …

  • BRider May 18, 2018 (3:22 pm)

    It’s alway’s fun to read Jort’s anti car rants. It’s especially fun considering in past posts has said he owns a car and knows all about WS traffic because he drives all over WS. The anti car rants are so his F350 will have plenty of space!

    • sigh May 18, 2018 (4:30 pm)

      Glad you are having fun, but to suggest his position is weakened by him driving is a logical fallacy (tu quoque).  

      It’s okay to have a car and drive and also think that we have too many cars and too much reliance on them.  

    • Jort May 18, 2018 (8:32 pm)

      Thanks for reading! It’s always great to learn that I have fans who passionately follow my work with great detail and memory. I love my fans!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, comment time is over.