East Washington BUILD Committee

March 15, 2007 10:28 am

A few weeks ago, an email I sent to the East Washington BUILD Committee caused a typical panic and backlash from members of the business community. In that email, I said that I would not be sponsoring the resolution that accepted the East Washington BUILD committee report, mostly due to the “process”. That was a mistake.

In my haste, I didn’t clearly articulate the issues that were underlying that comment about “process”. Luckily, only a few hours after getting off the plane from my vacation yesterday morning, I was able to attend the middle portion of the Urban Design Commission meeting on the plan. As I stood in the hallway (the room was overflowing) listening to the testimony, I was impressed by the folks who attended the meeting to express their concerns in a way that was so much more adequate than my feeble explanation of my objections to sponsoring the resolution.

My vacation-adled brain was quickly reminded of what the issues at hand were. And here, I will try to begin to outline what some of those issues are, though I am likely missing a few issues as I try to refresh my memory regarding the many months of work done in 2005.

1. There is a disconnect between the stated goals of the plan and the specific recommendations of the plan.

The stated goals of the plan are not in dispute. The goals are as follows:

Protect and enhance the iconic view of the Capitol.

Incorporate building setbacks and stepbacks to protect the view of the Capitol.
Incorporate minimum and maximum heights for buildings that directly front along East Washington Avenue that may then stepup or down away from the Avenue.
Incorporate building setbacks and stepbacks to frame views of the Capitol in a complementary fashion from one side of EastWashington Avenue to the other.
Incorporate varied building stepbacks and varied roof designs within permissible height limits to avoid a walling/canyon affect of the Capitol view corridor and a plateau affect of flat and uniform building tops.
Incorporate building designs, materials, and exterior colors that complement surrounding development and do not attract attention to the detriment of the view of the Capitol.

Respect and strengthen existing neighborhoods

Provide a mix of housing types that, together with the existing housing stock of the adjoining neighborhoods, provides a wide range of housing options within the Corridor.
Provide a mix of commercial uses that serve the needs of the adjoining neighborhoods and other development within the Corridor that are complementary with the existing commercial uses and districts located north and south of the Corridor.
Where adjacent to existing residential uses, adopt height limits and building setbacks and stepbacks to provide a compatible street level scale and adequate solar access.
Where adjacent to existing residential uses, incorporate building designs, materials and colors that are consistent with the existing residential environment.
Orient primary vehicular entries to side streets, where possible, and locate service areas in internal courts to minimize development related traffic and effects on East Mifflin and East Main Streets.
Provide building orientations and scales, streetscape features,and public gathering areas along the north-south side streets to create safe and inviting pedestrian and bicycling connections between the neighborhoods and East Washington Avenue.
Enhance street-oriented activities and concentrate streetscape amenities on corners with signalized crosswalks across East Washington Avenue to encourage and direct pedestrian traffic between the north and south sides of the street.
Provide transit shelters and other amenities that serve neighborhood residents as well as users of the development within the Corridor.

Firmly establish the corridor as an employment center supported by transit land uses.

Permit a broad range of employment land uses, especially on the south side of East Washington Avenue.
Permit a mix of integrated uses within areas designated as employment to support the needs of employees and employers (such as small-scale retail, personal and business services, and, possibly, limited residential or live-work spaces) – discourage freestanding commercial and residential development in these areas.
Encourage development of housing where identified as appropriate on the north side of East Washington Avenue that would be attractive to employees on the south side to increase livework options.
Permit intensive development of parcels identified for employment including a high percentage of lot coverage, high floor area ratios, and multiple stories as an off-set to high land costs and to maximize existing infrastructure investments.
Work with existing businesses to determine future plans and needs so they can grow and prosper in their current location.
Work with existing property owners to develop a complete inventory of available space, lease rates, and build-to-suit opportunities.
Develop marketing materials and a marketing strategy to actively promote the Corridor to new and expanded businesses.
Recognize East Washington Avenue’s designation as the primary auto and truck route into downtown to and from the east, and ensure that development patterns do not inadvertently direct through traffic to other east-west streets on the Isthmus.
Use TIF funds and other revenue sources to provide parking, transit, and related public amenities needed to attract new employers to the Corridor.
Provide incentives for employers/employees to use transit and modes of transportation other than automobiles.
Develop additional transit options including streetcars and/or commuter rail.
Use TIF and other programs to encourage the building of shared-parking facilities concurrent with new development.
Widen sidewalks and add streetscape amenities to encourage pedestrian activity along East Main Street.
Recognize that mobility is the key to area’s redevelopment and encourage a full range of transportation options to move people, goods, and services within and through the Corridor.

Create an inviting, vibrant Boulevard along East Washington Avenue

Promote a mix of active ground floor uses consistent with the land use plan.
Establish uniform minimum and maximum heights for buildings fronting directly on East Washington Avenue that may then step up or down away from the Avenue.
Incorporate uniform setbacks and expanded sidewalks to provide a comfortable environment for pedestrians by providing greater distances from moving traffic on East Washington Avenue.
Incorporate complementary building setbacks and stepbacks from one side of East Washington Avenue to the other to frame the Capitol and provide a consistent sense of enclosure.
Orient main building entries to East Washington Avenue by incorporating entry plazas and other ground level design elements.
Develop a consistent palette and design concept for trees and other landscaping within the East Washington Avenue setbacks, terraces, and medians to create a sense of unity from one end of the Corridor to the other consistent with the goal to protect views of the Capitol.
Create a consistent rhythm of street level facades from one end of the Corridor to the other.
Incorporate uniform setbacks to accommodate landscaping, entry plazas, and outdoor gathering and activity areas such as dining and art displays.
Incorporate design elements on the lower 3-5 stories, including stepbacks, that clearly differentiate the lower floors from the upper floors and that create a more comfortable and inviting environment for pedestrians.
Provide a high level of transparency on the lower levels of buildings – prohibit large blank walls.
Require a continuous, uninterrupted block face – prohibit interruptions for vehicular access from East Washington Avenue unless no other option is available.
Respect and highlight historic buildings by setting back and stepping back new development and additions.
Promote the use of high performance “green” building designs and materials that incorporate the reuse or materials, natural materials, energy efficiency, stormwater capture and reuse, green roofs, etc.
Prohibit new surface parking lots and other service areas fronting along East Washington Avenue as redevelopment occurs.
Incorporate transit amenities, such as shelters, at regular intervals along the Corridor.

Everyone agrees, these are great goals. But where the plan falls apart is where is makes the specific recommendations on pages that follow. Many of the recommendations about heights don’t seem to accomplish the goals stated above, and in several cases, work at cross purposes with the goals.

2. The transportation piece of the plan is not complete. As one of the speakers pointed out, this plan is lacking in transportation planning beyond planning for parking. The plan is incomplete and we need to finish that piece of the discussion. Until we have a plan for transportation on the isthmus, increasing density of uses is problematic.

3. The plan conflicts with other isthmus plans. Unfortunately, many of the materials provided by neighborhood folks are not on legistar at the moment and I will try to link materials as I figure out how to get them on line somewhere. For the moment, suffice it to say, that it is miserable when we pass plans that conflict with each other and then a project comes forward. We need to make sure that we are consistent in our plans and that we are creating clear expectations for developers and not subjecting them to the whims of whomever is on the committees making decisions when a project gets voted on.

4. The plan lacks a comprehensive vision. As I was standing in the hallway, one of the neighbors commented to me that there were good elements in this plan, however, the vision for what the area should be was not clear. In short, if you had to summarize the plan, it is difficult as it seems that the plan tried to be all things to all people instead of accomplishing a clear and comprehensive vision for the area. In short, if we pass the plan as it is, we are setting ourselves up to repeat these arguments we are having today, for years to come every time a project gets voted on.

A couple things the concerns about this plan are not:

1. It is not only about height. Or density. (Remember, height does not equal density) Or sprawl. It is curious to me that sometimes months and months of work can sometimes be boiled down to one, overly simplified talking point. We have all of those great goals above, that everyone agrees on, and yet, most of the discussion is about if buildings should be 8 stories or 15 stories. The whole conversation is completely out of sync with reality. At the moment, we have 2 or maybe 3 story buildings and we are all in agreement to increase the density, dramatically. We will decrease sprawl. We will increase the density. We will have more height. We all agree that should happen. The issues are much more nuanced than how tall a building should be. This issue is about how density can be achieved while accomplishing all those other good goals we have listed above. And more importantly, will we get what we want in the goals above if we approve buildings that meet the standards outlined in the plan?

2. It is not a compromise. As is often done, several people have said that we should pass this plan because no one is happy and that is a good sign of a compromise. What is often forgotten is that compromise is supposed to be a win-win situation. Everyone being unhappy is the sign of a really bad compromise. And worse yet, in this situation, the major issue is that we should finish the work of the committee. Making sure that we have that common vision for transportation and the physical form that the isthmus should take is crucial. Without that, we have wasted $100,000 of taxpayer money and are dooming ourselves to re-discuss these same issues time after time, project by project, and we will end up the same old tired story where the business community is dissatisfied with City government and neighbors who will say that we don’t listen to them.

The good news is, that we still have time to fix this and prevent an undesirable outcome.