Monday, September 8th, the Planning, Land Use, & Neighborhoods Committee (yes, the acronym is PLUNC) of the city council will hold a public hearing about updating the neighborhood plans. It’s been 10 years since the current plans were developed and approved; Seattle has changed and the neighborhood plans need to reflect those changes. PLUNC is actively seeking input from neighborhood groups, local business owners, interested individuals, etc.

Not all neighborhoods are included in the proposed update, due to recent or current neighborhood improvement and development initiatives. These are:
 The Duwamish and Ballard-Interbay areas, due to the Industrial Jobs Initiative work program;
 Denny Triangle, due to 2006 zoning work;
 Pioneer Square and the International district, due to ongoing S. Downtown planning initiatives;
 South Lake Union, for the same reason;
 Roosevelt, because the neighborhood has already recently revised it’s plan;
 Northgate, due to ongoing planning initiatives;
 South Park, due to the new Neighborhood Action Agenda.

While the core goal is to update the original plan, PLUNC has committed to several new goals that reflect the increased diversity of Seattle’s population, such as: greater outreach to communities, especially underserved and minority groups; increased density and mixed-use development; “green, clean, safe, affordable, and healthy” neighborhoods; and encouraging local investment and character.

One of core principles behind the new goals is a stronger focus towards renewable and sustainable development that reduces Seattle’s carbon footprint. This ties in with the council’s Zero Waste initiative, the bag fee, and proposed (though somewhat vague) food waste initiatives.

The first neighborhood plans to be reviewed will be those with light rail stations: MLK @ Holly Street; North Beacon Hill; and North Rainier.

A full overview is available for viewing here and related topics can be surfed at http://www.seattle.gov/council/.

That’s the only conclusion I can come to upon reading their new rules governing city council members blogging.

Yes, they’re less restrictive than what was rumored at yesterday, but still, they read like some antsy lawyers got in the same room with the group of IT guys up there who’ve never been near the Web (and probably wish it was all written in Java so they could understand it.)

Here’s a gem:

Links to external content should open in a new window: Hyperlinks to external content should open a new tab, or “spawned” browser window. Visitors should be advised that pop-up blockers may interfere with this action.

First off, “spawned” windows? What do these people think this is, Team Fortress 2? Secondly, there are considerable arguments against popping open new windows every time you click on an external link. Most notably, everyone using Firefox (roughly 1/3 of all users) is running a pop-up blocker by default. And thirdly, do they think us readers are stupid and can’t tell the difference between a city website and, oh, a local newspaper?

Here’s another beauty:

To ensure that information is secure, access is easily available, and personal information is protected, avoid referencing or linking to sites that:
….
ii. Require subscription or registration. When this is done, label these links “registration required”.

Yes, please avoid linking to the New York Times, city council member. But maybe council members are a little new at this computer thing. I’m sure Jean Godden will figure out those pesky punch cards in no time, though!

iii. Attempt to install malware on a visitor’s computer.

Wait, council members have to be told to note sites require registration because they don’t have experience with this, but now you’re expecting them to know what malware is, much less figure out which sites are carrying that payload?

Somewhere in the thousands in taxes, parking fees, and forthcoming bag fees, is any of it set aside for virus protection software? You know, the kind that keeps sites from installing malware on city computers???

x. Include content that would be identified as inappropriate to be linked to a City site by the Office of Ethics and Elections.

And they would know that… how? By the presence of malware? Registration? Link shorteners?

If the problem, in the end, is making sure council members are blogging appropriately, why doesn’t the city host blogs for them? What, you think it’s going to cost them money? Wordpress, ExpressionEngine, and the open source version of Movable Type are free. All you need is a database — oh look, MySQL is free! — and space on the servers they probably already have. Oh, and some people up there who know how to create websites, people with web design, web development, and web production experience. (Hint to the city’s IT department: None of these skills require Java, and no, you can’t create a web page in Java, and please try not to.)

I mean, what’s it going to take, City Hall? A couple thousand, at the very most? That’s what the city probably drops on wining and dining corporate muckymucks at Canlis in a month. And think about it — if you actually used a real platform, you could have comments, from local citizens, talking about what’s in the post. Constituents could actually try to engage and interact with blogging city employees and council members.

This is what open, transparent democracy looks like. Having council members like Burgess and Harrell and Clark blog — and interact with their readers through commenting — means more access to government.

And all you have to do is grab some people who know how to blog and get them to help you. Let’s start with getting actual bloggers to help you rewrite these rules so they are usable and sensible. I’m sure if you looked really hard you might find some local bloggers in Seattle. Check your punch cards, Ms. Godden.

If you live in Seattle and own a car, you know already that residential parking can be a real pain in the neck. Heck, I don’t even drive and I know that. The Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) is aware of this, too, and that’s why they’ve released a draft of recommended changes to the Residential Parking Zone (RPZ) program which has been used here in Seattle for almost thirty years.

You can read the either the condensed fact sheet or the more inclusive summary document online. After you’ve reviewed either or both of the documents, take a survey online, or, better yet, send your own thoughtful comments regarding the RPZ review directly to the SDOT.

With my pizza last week came a lesson on how democracy is supposed to work. Thanks Pagliacci! Your seasonal Tomato Basil pizza was amazing and now I know why we vote in November as opposed to June. Next time, though, please cite your sources. The whole underside of the box was left unused.

(Seriously, vote. And seriously, their seasonal Tomato Basil pizza is amazing.)

Today is voting day. If you are registered to vote, please do so. If you are not registered, why not fix that today?

What could be better than voting? It’s free, it’s fun, and it matters!

* The Westwood Neighborhood Council meeting will be held at the SW Police Precinct Community Room, 2300 SW Webster, tonight at 7:00 PM, due to the Community Center remodel. Tim Gallagher, Seattle Parks and Recreation Superintendent, will be there to discuss the Westwood Neighborhood concept plan for the Denny site and community center.

* White Center now has two neighborhood blogs, an embarrassment of riches. White Center Now is affiliated with West Seattle Blog; White Center Blog is affiliated with The B-Town (Burien) Blog. Amusingly, the blogs’ affiliations (and respective food drives) reflect the ongoing debate about incorporating White Center—Seattle or Burien? City mouse or country mouse? How about any mouse that will provide adequate streetlights, crosswalks, and sidewalks?

* Speaking of pedestrian facilities, White Center’s award-winning Hope VI Greenbridge community has some very nice public art and, unlike the Olympic Sculpture Park, it is both accessible and interactive. While the weather is nice, take the Greenbridge Artwalk to get some exercise, enjoy the sunshine, and discover this innovative public housing project.

* Less pedestrian, but still foot-related, Dancing for Joy continues every Tuesday at Westlake Park (downtown Seattle), until August 28th. Tonight is Triple-time Swing! Lessons are available from 6:00 – 7:00 PM; the dancing is in full, er, swing from 7:00 – 9:00 PM.

Primary season is coming up, so the pile of postal mail is getting a bit thicker. In between an ad from a fly-by-night mortgage broker and a student loan bill was a card from the Municipal League of King County, giving their “ballot recommendations.”

(Aside for the fly-by-night mortgage broker crowd: Guys, the sub-prime and exotic loan market is gone. Go make an honest living. I saw a help wanted ad at Taco Time last week.)

Back to the ballot recommendations. Admit it, that list of judges looks like one long set of unfamiliar names. Actually, the Municipal League agrees, but there were two candidates that got the dreaded NOT QUALIFIED stamp.

Well, that looks entertaining. Let’s see why:

There’s C.F. (Frank) Vulliet, the “not qualified” candidate for state supreme court. He’s running against “outstanding” incumbent Charles Johnson. Vulliet’s story is straightforward: he’s a “self-employed, semiretired” attorney who isn’t allowed to practice law. He’s retired enough that he’s not bothering to keep up the continuing education all practicing lawyers are required to take.

A state Supreme Court judge who isn’t allowed to practice law? Sure, why not.

Then there’s Matthew Hale. He was described by the P-I as “ambitious.” Well, yeah, if I had the chutzpah to run for a place on the superior court after a mere three years in practice, they’d probably call me ambitious too.

Hale’s chief claim to fame is that he’s widely supported by off-road motorcycle and ATV enthusiasts. Why? Well, that’s going to take a little explaining, but Goldy at horsesass.org already did the hard work:

Hale’s opponent is an experienced judge by the name of Laura Middaugh. Middaugh is married to a state senator, Adam Kline. Adam Kline once wrote a hilarious e-mail telling off-road enthusiasts how little he thought of them. Therefore, several off-roaders are voting against Kline’s wife.

“I don’t care what anyone says,” wrote one dirtbike enthusiast. “She [Middaugh] is a lawyer who’s [sic] hubby is a lawyer who has a personal agenda. No way possible [sic] she is not going to support his agenda.”

Democracy in action.

This is via Ann Donovan via Lori Metcalf (Director of Administration, Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle)

The following highlights feedback received from community members who attended the four streetcar forums in July 2008. The forums were held to present the preliminary concept route map for streetcars, and then discuss details associated with the line through each of the neighborhoods. The four forums were held for: the Central Line, Ballard/Fremont Line, University Line, and First Hill/Capitol Hill Line.

The first section below presents general comments that would apply to all of the potential lines. It lists the Pros and Cons heard at the forums. Then for all lines as well as the individual lines, questions raised by attendees are listed.

(more…)

We’ve all been tempted before…it’s late on a Friday night and you need somewhere to park. There’s a space that isn’t quite big enough and if you just moved the scooter over 6 inches, you could fit. Have you done it?

Photo by lastrandy

Apparently enough people have. City Council just voted in favor of a new $38 fine for moving a scooter.

“We cannot tolerate this behavior in Seattle at a time when we want to make it easier for people to use alternative transportation,” said Councilmember Jan Drago, whose Transportation Committee recommended the measure.

I will be a scooter owner later this year and this very issue has concerned me enough that I will be renting a parking space in my apartment building in order to avoid incidents. Not only do people move scooters, but they also bump them with their cars, causing superficial and mechanical damage.

Source

Micro Cranes by Seattle Rainscreen

It’s possible that the seemingly never-ending mass production of ugly townhouses is actually coming to an end. At least that’s what Mayor Nickels is promoting. In a recent press meeting, Nickels announced that city planners will review every proposed townhouse design (they weren’t before?!?), with new regulations for specific design changes. These changes include the addition of more windows, wider driveways, lower fences along the public walkways, and more entrances facing the street.

The changes are at least confirmation that the city is listening to neighborhood complaints, but I’m not sure that it’s enough to appease the masses. I haven’t been able to figure out why townhouses have been so popular. In my opinion, they are cheaply made, obtrusive, cookie-cutter bland places to live. The positive side is that it is bringing folks into the city from the suburbs.
(more…)