If you say "height" you may be uttering a four-letter word. At least you might when discussing raising the allowable building height along Broadway. If not a negative word, height can certainly carry a controversial connotation.
Last week's public forum by City Council's Urban Development and Planning Committee, chaired by councilmember Peter Steinbreuck at Seattle Central Community College, underscored the point.
The issue at hand was a mayoral proposal to raise zoning on Broadway from its current 40 feet to a 65 foot ceiling. This would permit six-story buildings on Broadway; currently four are allowed, though most properties are greatly underdeveloped.
The proposal also called for eliminating split zoning, which affects several properties on Broadway that have different zoning requirements for the side facing Broadway as opposed to the side facing Harvard or 10th avenues. The hope is to make the zoning requirement less complicated and thus more attractive for developers. The potential zoning changes affect Broadway properties from East Pine to East Roy streets.
The inspiration for the move, as well as for the council's recent decision to lower the number of parking spaces residential developers must provide, is an effort to revitalize Broadway, a major business district that by virtually all accounts is either stagnant or in serious decline. But while there is agreement that something needs to be done, there are a variety of points of view regarding how best to get there. While a generalization, it's fair to say that property and business owners favored the changes while residents did not.
Those supporting the height increase said creating more residential units on Broadway would put more people on the street and encourage a healthier retail mix.
"I'm not here for short-term gain on our property," said Alan Jones, adding that he was a lifelong Capitol Hill resident who has been involved in numerous community organizations. "I'm here supporting this proposal to increase the height. There are plenty of people on Capitol Hill who won't come to Broadway to shop anymore. The reason is there's nothing to buy, the retail mix has gone downhill in the last 10 years and it's in a desperate shape at this point in time."
Greg Serum, a 20-year Capitol Hill resident and a member of the Broadway Business Improvement Association, also spoke in favor of the change.
"I support a vibrant Broadway and want to see more people up here. Having more height will give us more eyes on the street and better public safety."
"As the owner of an independent, small business, I think this is the best choice for the street," said Michael Wells, owner of Bailey-Coy Books. "The deterioration on this street has been drastic. We need a vibrant street life and Broadway does not have it. The health of the neighborhood is determined by what [Broadway] looks like. A lot of business owners cannot wait any longer up here."
Matthew Burton, who chairs the Seattle Pedestrian Advisory Board, said he'd like to see the community go for more street life on Broadway:
"Single-story buildings along Broadway are not going to provide that. Residents are the natural caretakers of the street. Ninety to 95 percent of the character of the street has to do with what happens at ground level. I support the proposal."
Voices opposed to the measure claimed that the character of Broadway would change drastically if taller buildings were allowed. Not much light would reach Broadway, one man said, if all its buildings reached 65-feet.
"I'm against the entire upzone," said Alan Deright. "I think things can be done at 40 feet. [The proposal] is adding density to the most densely populated ZIP code neighborhoods on the west coast to add future riders for Sound Transit. I'm not against development. Why don't we just name the street as Broadway Canyon Boulevard, because that's the effect it will have."
Ann Donovan, president of the Capitol Hill Community Council, referenced a survey the organization took to learn how the community felt about the height increase.
"We found that the majority of respondents felt that keeping the current zoning at four stories was what they favored," she said. "It wasn't that they didn't want things to change, but that four stories should be enough."
She asked the City Council to pay attention to all points of view:
"Take a step back and make Broadway a better climate for developers to bring in better retail and at the same time preserve the character of Broadway. Make sure we're listening to the voice of the broader neighborhood."
Rich Lang mentioned a recent workshop where roughly 70 percent were against upzoning:
"They didn't like it because they thought the neighborhood already had density. Density is not the solution - we already have density. Many people on the Hill moved here because they liked the neighborhood character. Please don't destroy it to appease developers."
One owner pointed out that even if the change was allowed, it's not that six-story buildings will sprout up quickly. But the owners of two important vacant north Broadway properties pointed to their respective sites, and the issues they face, when speaking in favor of the rezone.
Mike Nelson, who recently bought the former Safeway building at the north end of Broadway, said that he didn't think fears that the block will be developed into a huge, monolithic building were well founded. But he said he supported the zoning change because better projects could result.
"We are at a crossroads at [the former Safeway] site. I think we need more density. A lot of how our project evolves depends on what the council decides," he said.
Bob Burkheimer, who owns the former QFC and Bartell property, spoke forcefully on the issue:
"I've spent six years trying to make the development work and it just won't at 40 feet," he said. "If you like the blank wall you get to keep it. Broadway is not going to 65 feet every building. We need some redevelopment, some anchors, to get the local merchants who can benefit from a local anchor. We're all in this together, the key is to have vital economic neighborhoods. If we do redevelopment it's for the next generation."
Following public testimony, Councilmember Steinbrueck pointed out that the University District received a great deal of city attention recently but not a substantial rezone.
"I observe that the U-district has suffered the same ailments as Broadway, a decline of business and a lack of public safety and degrading conditions over a long period of time," he said. "Are there some parallels here? Is Broadway that different? I hear a lot of the same concerns. Is zoning going to be a panacea here?"
On Friday, May 6, three days after the public forum, Steinbrueck's committee met to discuss the rezoning issue. In what may prove an interesting alternative, the councilmember proposed that the height limit not be raised passed 40 feet unless the extra space went for housing that included setbacks and an incentive for affordable housing. (Details to be determined in the future.)
The committee will likely vote on the zoning proposal on June 2, which could lead to a vote by the full council on June 6 or 13.
Doug Schwartz is the editor of the Capitol Hill Times. He can be reached at editor@capitolhilltimes.com or 461-1308.
[[In-content Ad]]
