James Bond Agent 007
Dec 2, 2006, 9:23 AM
Yeah!!! :banana:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003458037_extraheight02m.html
Saturday, December 2, 2006
High-rises for South Lake Union, Northgate?
By Bob Young
Seattle Times staff reporter
Seattle's skyline, already reaching higher downtown, may be about to change in places such as Sodo and South Lake Union.
Mayor Greg Nickels wants to let developers build taller in some areas of the city, but says they'll have to pay for it.
Nickels next year plans to propose allowing buildings to go much higher in Sodo, South Lake Union, Northgate and a slice of the Interbay area near 15th Avenue West and West Dravus Street. The buildings would not be as high as some downtown. The mayor says taller buildings are needed to handle population growth.
To get the extra height, which adds value to property, developers would have to contribute to affordable housing or some other public benefit. Such a program was put in place in the downtown zoning changes.
"There's no question here. This is going to happen. I've told them [developers] point-blank. We've said growth is going to pay for growth," Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said.
Developers aren't surprised the mayor wants to take a version of the downtown zoning he pushed for last year citywide.
"We expected this was going to happen," said Lyn Tangen, director of community and government relations for Vulcan, which is redeveloping 60 acres in the South Lake Union area.
Neither the exact height limits nor the specific public-benefit requirements have been set.
Nathan Torgelson, a Nickels adviser, said height increases in some parts of the South Lake Union area could be "significant." Torgelson said areas where building heights are now capped at 125 feet (roughly 10 to 12 stories) could be bumped up to 200 or 300 feet, depending on factors such as topography, view blockage and proximity to downtown.
In parts of Sodo, city planners have recommended heights up to 240 feet, doubling what is now allowed. In the so-called Dravus commercial area, northeast of the Interbay playfields and golf course, city planners are considering going from 40 feet to 125 feet.
By way of comparison, the Safeco building in the University District is 325 feet tall.
Nickels also wants developers to pay for zoning changes that would not give extra height but would reduce parking requirements for apartments and condos or allow more units per project.
Among the key questions are how much to require of developers and whether to put the benefits such as affordable housing in the same building or close by, said Sharon Lee, a nonprofit housing developer who is part of a group of developers, community representatives and city officials talking about how the proposal might work in the South Lake Union area.
The mayor's plan is to conduct economic analyses, calculate the value added by the height increases and adopt laws that extract payments from developers that still allow them to make enough profit to stay in Seattle.
For downtown, the City Council earlier this year settled on a formula requiring developers to pay roughly $19 per square foot (Nickels proposed $10) for buildings that exceed height limits. That money goes into an affordable-housing pool. Developers also have to meet energy-efficient building standards to get the extra height.
Some developers had argued that would be too onerous and would drive developers to booming cities like Bellevue.
Tangen, of Vulcan, said it's important to look at results of the downtown program.
"Frankly, I hope we have some experience in seeing how the downtown model works before the downtown model gets duplicated everywhere," she said.
So far, one new tower is being built under the new rules and five others are in the permitting process, according to the planning department.
City officials and developers say Nickels' proposal must strike a delicate balance.
If developers have to pay too much for public benefit, they may build outside the city, promoting sprawl. If they're not charged enough, they may enjoy windfall profits while workers move farther and farther from their jobs in search of affordable housing.
Councilman Tom Rasmussen, who leads the council's housing committee, said he has advocated such a plan and along with Councilman Nick Licata has drafted a resolution supporting the mayor's policy. Rasmussen's committee will take up the resolution next week.
"When the city changes the value of property through zoning, I believe there should be a return to the city," he said.
Lee, executive director of the Low Income Housing Institute, says the South Lake Union group has considered a range of possible public benefits including historic preservation, arts facilities, community centers and schools. "I think the majority felt strongly that housing should be the primary public benefit," she said.
Lee stressed that South Lake Union is likely to absorb thousands of new condos and apartments in the next decade — much of which is "essentially luxury housing" — and the city should make sure there's a balance of incomes in the neighborhood.
Tangen noted developers are already providing public benefits including additional tax revenue and jobs, while preventing suburban sprawl by putting housing close to jobs and public transit.
"All of that kind of gets lost in the tendency to see developers as bad. Development is a really risky proposition and the question is when is the developer willing to say they're not going to take the risk," she said.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003458037_extraheight02m.html
Saturday, December 2, 2006
High-rises for South Lake Union, Northgate?
By Bob Young
Seattle Times staff reporter
Seattle's skyline, already reaching higher downtown, may be about to change in places such as Sodo and South Lake Union.
Mayor Greg Nickels wants to let developers build taller in some areas of the city, but says they'll have to pay for it.
Nickels next year plans to propose allowing buildings to go much higher in Sodo, South Lake Union, Northgate and a slice of the Interbay area near 15th Avenue West and West Dravus Street. The buildings would not be as high as some downtown. The mayor says taller buildings are needed to handle population growth.
To get the extra height, which adds value to property, developers would have to contribute to affordable housing or some other public benefit. Such a program was put in place in the downtown zoning changes.
"There's no question here. This is going to happen. I've told them [developers] point-blank. We've said growth is going to pay for growth," Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said.
Developers aren't surprised the mayor wants to take a version of the downtown zoning he pushed for last year citywide.
"We expected this was going to happen," said Lyn Tangen, director of community and government relations for Vulcan, which is redeveloping 60 acres in the South Lake Union area.
Neither the exact height limits nor the specific public-benefit requirements have been set.
Nathan Torgelson, a Nickels adviser, said height increases in some parts of the South Lake Union area could be "significant." Torgelson said areas where building heights are now capped at 125 feet (roughly 10 to 12 stories) could be bumped up to 200 or 300 feet, depending on factors such as topography, view blockage and proximity to downtown.
In parts of Sodo, city planners have recommended heights up to 240 feet, doubling what is now allowed. In the so-called Dravus commercial area, northeast of the Interbay playfields and golf course, city planners are considering going from 40 feet to 125 feet.
By way of comparison, the Safeco building in the University District is 325 feet tall.
Nickels also wants developers to pay for zoning changes that would not give extra height but would reduce parking requirements for apartments and condos or allow more units per project.
Among the key questions are how much to require of developers and whether to put the benefits such as affordable housing in the same building or close by, said Sharon Lee, a nonprofit housing developer who is part of a group of developers, community representatives and city officials talking about how the proposal might work in the South Lake Union area.
The mayor's plan is to conduct economic analyses, calculate the value added by the height increases and adopt laws that extract payments from developers that still allow them to make enough profit to stay in Seattle.
For downtown, the City Council earlier this year settled on a formula requiring developers to pay roughly $19 per square foot (Nickels proposed $10) for buildings that exceed height limits. That money goes into an affordable-housing pool. Developers also have to meet energy-efficient building standards to get the extra height.
Some developers had argued that would be too onerous and would drive developers to booming cities like Bellevue.
Tangen, of Vulcan, said it's important to look at results of the downtown program.
"Frankly, I hope we have some experience in seeing how the downtown model works before the downtown model gets duplicated everywhere," she said.
So far, one new tower is being built under the new rules and five others are in the permitting process, according to the planning department.
City officials and developers say Nickels' proposal must strike a delicate balance.
If developers have to pay too much for public benefit, they may build outside the city, promoting sprawl. If they're not charged enough, they may enjoy windfall profits while workers move farther and farther from their jobs in search of affordable housing.
Councilman Tom Rasmussen, who leads the council's housing committee, said he has advocated such a plan and along with Councilman Nick Licata has drafted a resolution supporting the mayor's policy. Rasmussen's committee will take up the resolution next week.
"When the city changes the value of property through zoning, I believe there should be a return to the city," he said.
Lee, executive director of the Low Income Housing Institute, says the South Lake Union group has considered a range of possible public benefits including historic preservation, arts facilities, community centers and schools. "I think the majority felt strongly that housing should be the primary public benefit," she said.
Lee stressed that South Lake Union is likely to absorb thousands of new condos and apartments in the next decade — much of which is "essentially luxury housing" — and the city should make sure there's a balance of incomes in the neighborhood.
Tangen noted developers are already providing public benefits including additional tax revenue and jobs, while preventing suburban sprawl by putting housing close to jobs and public transit.
"All of that kind of gets lost in the tendency to see developers as bad. Development is a really risky proposition and the question is when is the developer willing to say they're not going to take the risk," she said.