Superior Court has granted Summary Judgement to the City on the Planned Action Ordinance
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Statement from Shoreline Preservation Society
In the matter of the Ordinance 707, The Planned Action Ordinance the Court has granted Summary Judgement to the City of Shoreline vs Shoreline Preservation Society. The community group had sought to oppose this ordinance which abrogates the rights of citizens to receive notice, comment of appeal development proposals.
The judge let this stand as well as the EIS. However, there was minimal explanation as to why in the ruling.
“Of course we are disappointed and disagree with the Judge’s opinion, “ said Janet Way, President of the Shoreline Preservation Society.
“We are studying the ruling and deciding what options and strategies might be possible going forward. We will decide what course of action we might take further as necessary. But we are still working hard on issues of immediate importance and concern on the 145th Rezones and on informing our neighbors of what is happening. Though we are saddened by this decision, we will continue to advocate for the environment and to preserve things that matter in Shoreline.”
The ruling leaves in place the Planned Action Ordinance and EIS for the 185th Subarea.
This means that for the time being the mile-wide rezone and massive changes to the community will continue in relation to Light Rail Station Area development regardless of their impacts to the community. It remains to be seen what the actual impacts will be and the costs to the taxpayers and to special districts charged with providing services.
Posts
3 comments:
So since I live on 10th, south of 175th, can we expect the city to widen the roadway or otherwise mitigate the infusion of traffic headed to the light rail station and all the new apartment buildings around the station? We saw a dramatic increase in traffic when 15th was "calmed" by making it one lane each direction. Since 5th and 10th seem to be the only direct roads to 185th on the east side of the freeway, I'm pretty sure we will only have more speeding, lack of courtesy to walkers and bikers and the other random progress that will follow. We already have enough garbage around the park-n-ride to fill a dumpster every week. Just wonderin'
I'm sure everyone remembers this lovely press release from the city of Shoreline that was issued shortly after SAN broke the story about the preferred alternative: http://www.shorelineareanews.com/2014/09/city-will-not-use-eminent-domain-to.html
I'd like to draw your attention to the following statements, because they appear to no longer be accurate with some legislation that was passed over the Summer...
- "Sound Transit doesn't have any plans to purchase property for residential or commercial redevelopment."
- "Sound Transit will be using its eminent domain authority to purchase, at fair market value, some private property for construction of the Lynnwood Link Light Rail itself, ***but any such purchase will be strictly for the construction of the line, the stations, and parking.***"
- "Redevelopment of the station areas will be determined entirely by private property owners and private developers responding to market forces."
The following article from the Seattle Transit Blog mentions RCW 81.112.350 in an ST3 letter from (you guessed it!) a group of the developer lobbyists that graced us with their presence at many of the 185th PlanCom/Council Meetings. (7th section from the top: http://seattletransitblog.com/2016/02/24/community-feedback-on-sound-transit-3/)
"Sound Transit should prioritize affordable housing in the use and disposal of its land… The State Legislature has already required, in RCW 81.112.350, that Sound Transit sell 80% of its surplus land for affordable housing use. Additionally, ***Sound Transit is required to put $20 million in a revolving acquisition loan fund to acquire additional sites for affordable housing near transit.*** "
So, what exactly does that mean for our station areas? I would assume that the Planning Dept, Commission, Council, & Citizens Committees aware of this and how it's going to work into the station plans, no?
Does ST plan to ask nicely for volunteers? Or do they just plan on taking people's homes, calling it "surplus property" (which by definition, it's clearly not if the sole purpose is just to flip and rebuild), and handing them off to whoever's in cahoots with the consortiums? At a discount, no less, if this additional legislation that the lobbyists are lobbying for gets pushed through to sell surplus at less than fair market value. Combine that "discount" with the 12 year property tax exemption they've already been "gifted" by the City, that's a pretty handsome offer, no?
I have to wonder if this whole thing with the zoning and land use designations not being done in a timely manner for the stations, facilities, and rail line have less to do with those three things and more do with the large gash of "surplus" property that's going to be lining the East side of I-5. If so, all the more reason to go back, reboot, reset on the 185th upzone and PAO, since there's a whole set of factors that need to be worked in the equation and not go forward with the 145th plan, until the true potentials impacts from this particular, very important, piece of the web are examined.
I think it would behoove the City to issue a more 'current' and accurate press release that takes into account how this is going to impact the subareas.
Come to think of it, what better way for Sound Transit to weasel out of having to pay for tree replacement and or replace the sound barrier if that whole stretch along the e. side of I-5 is replaced with an affordable housing project that snakes along the light rail line?
Post a Comment