Ninety-nine reasons Not to Rezone: Objections to the Urban Waterfront Rezone and Height Amendment Proposal

author : Daisy Ouye topic : Waterfront

by WIP News Service

1. The community doesn't want it. Written comments submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council have been running approximately 4 to 1 against the rezone.

2. Most of the supporters of the rezone seem to be financially motivated: About one-third of written comments to the Council and Planning Commission in favor of the rezone were from people in the construction business and another third were from downtown merchants and business owners.

3. Beautiful views of Budd Inlet, the Olympics, and the Capitol dome will be blocked by massive, tall buildings. These views, envisioned in 1911 by the designers of the original Capitol Campus, are historically and culturally significant, and enhance the experience of visiting Washington’s Capitol City.

4. The rezone is highly divisive. The amount of public opposition demonstrates that the proposed measure is not acceptable to the community.

5. The space is much more suitable for a park. The formation of the Olympia Capitol Park Foundation, which has launched an initiative campaign to require the city to conduct a feasibility study of purchasing most of the land on the isthmus and turning into a park, has made this a reasonable possibility.

6. Olympia needs affordable downtown housing. Units which cost 800K to 1.2 million dollars are not affordable housing.

7. A piecemeal approach to rezoning a waterfront area is inappropriate when both the Shoreline Management Act and the city’s Comprehensive Plan are being updated.

8. Because of the tax break given to new housing construction downtown, this project would not improve Olympia’s tax base substantially for 8 years. At the same time, it will be a drain on city resources.

9. Middle and working class taxpayers would essentially be subsidizing services for the wealthy condo owners who move into Larida Passage.

10. The development project may raise property values, which could raise rents and displace current downtown residents and downtown businesses which will no longer be able to afford the rent on downtown storefronts. One of the greatest things about downtown Olympia is that ordinary people, not huge corporations, can afford to open one-of-a-kind businesses there.

11. Tri-way's development project will further contribute to gentrification.

12. Gentrification may lead to the further criminalization of homelessness.

13. Olympia already has a famed and vibrant downtown culture. This culture is both an export and an attraction. The condos will degrade this unique downtown lifestyle, if not render it extinct altogether.

14. The project will take away what are now community spaces and make them only for those who can afford to live and shop at the new development.

15. The community wants more community spaces and parks, not less.

16. The city’s traffic study shows that 141 units of housing and retail space on the isthmus will increase traffic 20% during peak hours. This area is a major thoroughfare between the Westside and downtown, already subject to congestion due to its bottleneck configuration.

17. This development is not consistent with the city’s Comprehensive Plan, which states that “tomorrow’s higher-density must also be accompanied by improved amenities for urban life.” This project would actually decrease amenities for the whole community.

18. The rezone may be in violation of the Shoreline Management Act, which states that “the interest of all the people shall be paramount in the management of shorelines of statewide significance.”

19. The proposed amendment violates Olympia Municipal Code in several ways, most notably in that rezones should not be “materially detrimental to uses or properties in the immediate vicinity.”

20. The proposed project will block views protected by the comprehensive plan.

21. Because the rezone is of dubious legality in several respects, if it passes, the city could become embroiled in costly litigation.

22. Resultant litigation would squander the city’s resources in a time of economic downturn, when the preservation of jobs and the maintenance of social services and other public services is more important than ever.

23. The developer’s representative’s assertion that this project will only affect 1% of the view is intellectually bankrupt. Putting aside questions about the possibility of quantifying aesthetic values, consider how the views are already affected by the Capitol Center Building (the “mistake”). Larida Passage will be considerably larger. One percent? Your cognitive account is overdrawn.

24. Luxury condos are not the sort of housing Olympia needs. According to Pat Tassoni, of the Thurston County Tenants Union, “In terms of city and regional planning to accommodate housing needs, what's most needed are not more upper/middle income units, but low-income units. Rich people have the choice of where they want to live already --- from which city, parts of cities, in the country somewhere. They have choices. The vacancy rate for their mortgage and rental value is the highest subset of the composite number. Where it's a zero vacancy rate is for those at 30% of the area median income. They have no choice of where to live -- they have to go wherever a unit is available, including sometimes to other cities.”

25. Many Olympians consider the isthmus to be “the heart of Olympia,” a sacred space. In A Pattern Language , a book written by six architects about urban design, the authors stress the importance of maintaining sacred sites: “People cannot maintain their spiritual roots and their connections to the past if the physical world they live in does not also sustain these roots… it essential that these specific sites be preserved and made important.“

26. Claims that this project will benefit the environment are dubious, relying heavily on generalizations about the value of high density housing, which could also applied to projects in more suitable locations and at prices more appropriate to Olympia. Building on the isthmus will not stop global warming.

27. Despite the claims of the developer, this rezone would do little to encourage walking, biking and bus use.

28. Many condos may be bought by out-of-towners who work elsewhere and commute, thus increasing Olympia’s carbon footprint.

29. The isthmus area is already vulnerable to flooding, and will almost certainly become increasingly more so as ocean levels rise. The City is currently studying how downtown Olympia will be impacted by rising sea levels.

30. City residents should not be expected to pay for flood mitigation for wealthy condo owners.

31. Condos would constitute yet another barrier to restoring the area to estuary. The salmon currently are weakened by the abrupt change of salt water to fresh water. (This is why they linger at the entrance to Capitol Lake; they are attempting to adjust to the change in water salinity.) The salmon are out of luck if the condos get built; wealthy property owners on the isthmus do not want a view of a swamp.

32. The popular salmon viewing bridge at 5th avenue near the old Kentucky Fried Chicken may no longer be accessible; even if it is, the views will be degraded.

33. The site of the proposed developments consists of unstable fill that used to be underwater. Building massive buildings on fill in an area due for earthquake is dangerous and potentially very expensive to the public. (Some people may not realize just how big the building will be, because drawings circulated by Triway picture them next to three-story high street lights.)

34. Triway has a poor environmental record; a number of the Cooper Crest development homeowners are unhappy with the way that environmentally sensitive area was developed, and Triway’s subsequent lack of response to their concerns.

35. Triway Enterprises may engage in a “bait and switch” maneuver with the city, promising housing in order to get the rezone, then proceeding with another project, or selling the land soon after the rezone makes it more valuable. The City’s own staff recommendation reflects this suspicion; it stipulates that a development agreement be included to address project specifics. However, even Olympia’s senior planner acknowledges that “There are no guarantees with that process.”

36. Triway Enterprises and its principal, Tri Vo, have an extensive record of litigation.

37. Downtown Olympia does not need “revitalizing.” Downtown is not in trouble. Diverse groups of businesses, including retail businesses, are thriving there. Stores close, but new stores open. Just in the last two years a number of new businesses have opened in downtown Olympia: Citi Lights, Aqua Via, Einmaleins, Blue Lotus, Inside Vintage, Cherry Street Roastery, The Royal, Gravity Beer Market. And there’s a creperie on the way.

38. Gentrification jeopardizes Oly’s unique character. As stated by downtown resident, Tovah Rudawski, “Gentrification is routinely successful in removing the cultural souls of cities, and the cultural soul we have here in Olympia, that ‘funky little downtown’ that we hear and read about so much, is one of the last of its kind.”

39. If people want to shop and dine in a comfortably monotonous, bourgeois environment, why don’t they just go to West Olympia? Or Lacey? Or Tumwater? Unless you already live downtown, you don’t have to drive far to find a Denny’s.

40. The supply-side economics argument that many proponents of the project rely on to assert that this project will benefit the entire community has not lived up to its promises in the past. Or, in the words of Kevin Laird of People for a Participatory City, “Trickledown is bullshit.”

41. The retail spaces of Larida Passage will compete with existing downtown businesses. In fact, the proposed project would provide more retail space than it would shoppers; the commercial space created would include roughly 47,000 square feet of retail. The 141 housing units, if actually sold to people who would occupy them, would create approximately 250 shoppers.

42. It is unlikely that many locally owned businesses will be able to afford the high rents of Larida Passage, bringing in soulless chain stores and restaurants which will siphon revenue from locally owned enterprises which may already be struggling. If property values go up, only chain stores can afford downtown. According to A Pattern Language, individually owned shops are beneficial to the community, whereas insipid franchises and chain stores are not. “When shops are too large, or controlled by absentee owners, they become plastic, bland and abstract.” Sounds like Lacey.

43. It isn't clear that Triway's project will be a financial success -- city staff's assessed the demand for this kind of housing as "relatively shallow" in the draft Environmental Impact Statement

44. Only 19 single family homes between $800,000 and $1.2 million and five condos priced between $474K and $625K solid in all of Thurston County last year.

45. Similar condos with beautiful views of Capitol Lake are sitting empty on the courthouse hill.

46. The national housing market is depressed; federal bailouts notwithstanding many millionaires are already foreclosing on their second and third homes. Why would they buy new condos now?

47. Similar luxury waterfront condos in Bremerton have sold so poorly that they have been offered up for auction at vastly reduced prices

48. Many of the condos may be bought by lobbyists, who will inhabit them for only a few months out of the year.

49. If these units sit vacant little money will be contributed to the community.

50. Close to 90 percent of downtown is already zoned for mixed using housing and shopping. Why not develop there if housing/mixed use is the goal?

51. If downtown is in need of revitalizing, why not redevelop any of the dozens of empty buildings on 4th avenue?

52. The proposed condominiums are aggressively outside of Olympia's design aesthetic.

53. The size bumps up too much -- the massive size of the proposed condos doesn't work aesthetically in that location. There is essentially zero height on Budd Inlet, Capitol Lake and the bridges. To jump immediately to 90 foot buildings would be visually displeasing.

54. A lot of anger will be generated among citizens when they are forced to subsidize housing for millionaires while cutting city spending on essential services, and losing access to public amenities.

55. Citizens of Olympia have fiercely resisted similar proposals repeatedly. Aren’t our representatives listening?

56. The downtown we live in and use presently is not the kind of environment that appeals to potential condo owners. This means that either they won't buy condos downtown, or downtown will have to be replaced with something more palatable.

57. The condos will create a massive cold dark canyon thru the first few blocks of downtown.

58. There has been significant public investment in Heritage Park – it is for the public, not the delectation of millionaires. It should not be degraded by this project.

59. Larida Passage or other developments may displace local establishment Traditions

60. There is a perception, whether accurate or not, that there may been collusion between the city council and Triway Enterprises... secret deals, campaign contributions, hiring of former councilmembers, etc. This, along with the council’s willingness to go along with the wishes of rich developers over the objections of the public, damages the public’s trust in elected representatives.

61. Shoreline Master Program revisions should not be done in a piecemeal fashion; the Friends of the Waterfront has been calling for a comprehensive visioning process for years. No changes should be made to the Shoreline Master Program before this community-wide visioning process has occurred.

62. Triway should be applying for a substantial shoreline development permit for this project, not just a rezone.

63. Altering the comp plan whenever any builder wants to put up a project sets a bad precedent, and encourages endless piecemeal fights about zoning like this one.

64. It’s poor urban and community planning. The authors of A Pattern Language recommend limiting the majority of buildings in dense urban areas to no more than four stories. “High buildings have no genuine advantages, except in speculative gains for banks and landowners….high-rise living takes people away from the ground, and away from the casual, everyday society that occurs on the sidewalks and streets and on the gardens and porches. It leaves them alone in their apartments.”

65. Another giant construction project, taking even longer than the bridge, will be another big step toward getting people on the West side of town out of the habit of coming downtown to shop and out of the habit of driving through the city rather than around it on the freeway.

66. The ability of the public to view the salmon swimming from Budd Bay into Capitol Lake will be impaired by construction in this area, and the salmon themselves may be adversely affected by the construction.

67. According to Jerry Reilly of the Olympia Capitol Park Foundation [see interview, page __] preserving the most important natural treasure of Olympia is beneficial to the financial stability of the city. “As we become more and more intensively developed throughout the country, these magnificent sites are becoming more rare and more valuable.”

68. Once the area is rezoned, the value of the property will jump immediately, making eventual public acquisition that much more difficult.

69. Once there are valuable buildings in the area, the possibility of razing them to return the area to a public space is made impractical.

70. Multiple owners (as in condominiums) makes public acquisition substantially more challenging.

71. Now is the time to transform the area into a park, when the many of the structures on the isthmus are vacant and decrepit. (The proposed park would not include the land now occupied by Bayview Thriftway, the Yacht Club or the Oyster House.)

72. Once the best public views in the city are turned into private property it will become harder and harder to justify not giving up what's left, because it isn't that special anyway

73. One problem about developing downtown is that no one knows where the front row of buildings facing the waterfront will end up. No one wants to put up a building with views if they can't have any confidence that the city means what it says when it sets waterfront height limits. Bumping this area from 35 to 90 feet in the face of deep opposition would strongly suggest that the rules might be changed to allow new building in front of anybody's view project.

74. Over and over, we hear pro-rezone people complaining that 90% of the housing downtown is subsidized and residents are too poor to spend money there. Pat Tassoni of the Thurston County Tenants Union calls this misleading. “There are different definitions (at least three) of what constitutes 'downtown'. It would be 90% if downtown is defined as the Farmers Market to Sylvester Park and the water to Franklin Street. It would not be 90% of downtown according to the comprehensive plan definition, which is Eastside Street to the water, the freeway/capitol campus to the Port. Actually, using the comp plan definition, only about 20% of downtown housing is subsidized.”

75. The subsidized housing which is the subject of complaint accommodates seniors and the disabled, community members who should be valued, not disdained. Tassoni also comments: “The SHAG [Senior Housing Assistance Group by the Farmers Market] and The Olympian are both low-income senior/disabled housing to make those numbers. Do pro-rezone people feel there are too many old people downtown already and what we need is more middle agers? Because we know they don’t want youth there!”

76. Public mistrust of the rezone process has arisen, due to underhanded tactics in trying to create the illusion of public support for the project via astroturfers Oly2012 and internet sockpuppets, as well as the question of improprieties with respect to local news and editorial coverage of the rezone.

77. Some Council Members risk the appearance of a conflict of interest on this issue given the substantial support that their campaigns received from the developer.

78. Rezoning would send a clear message that the city council listens to and supports the needs of developers over the needs of citizens, thus damaging their future political aspirations.

79. Government is supposed to protect the public interest against special/private interests. This rezone promotes private interests at public expense.

80. City Council members are going to be in a terrible position politically if they decide to go ahead and approve the rezone over the wishes of what clearly seems to be a large majority of the city, then they get sued because it turns out that the rezone's illegal under the state's laws protecting the public's interest in our shorelines. They will have squandered all that political capital for nothing.

81. Another possibility is that after the city council allows the rezone, Triway Enterprises will be unable to finance the project in a softening housing market. Property values on the isthmus will jump as soon as the area is rezoned, however, and a park will be much more difficult to finance. If the City Council acts unwisely, Olympia could end up with decrepit old buildings on the isthmus for another decade.

82. The Olympian opinion page has acted like a paid public relations agent for the rezone, but even the “news” about the rezone and proposed project has not demonstrated objectivity, often quoting from market studies and economic impact studies commissioned by Triway – how objective can we expect those studies to be?

83. Communications to the Planning Commission, including a letter from the State Department of Archaeology and Historical Preservation were not forwarded properly. At that time of the Commission’s deliberations on 7/21/08, they had not received 5% of the public communications regarding the amendment they recommended to the City Council.

84. The council would suffer citizen backlash over the construction fall-out at the isthmus area that could extend two or more years.

85. Given the geological fragility of the isthmus, it is likely that there will be many construction challenges in constructing massive buildings there.

86. In order to build on fill, there will have to be huge pilings put in the ground – people downtown will have to listen to the sound of pile drivers for a long while. The noise pollution will be considerable for a few years, worse than if construction was happening in a more geologically stable area. The salmon will probably find the noise irritating, as well.

87. Construction of the project would be extremely disruptive to traffic in an important traffic conduit which is already subject to congestion. Two years of construction will cut Olympia's Westside off from downtown, just as it did during the recent bridge construction. That hurts downtown merchants' pocketbooks.

88. The isthmus isn’t significant just to Olympia residents, but others as well. This area is enjoyed by many people who visit the Washington State Capitol.

89. All living former governors and first ladies signed a proclamation opposing the rezone, calling the view, “a treasured legacy for our citizens.”

90. The new Heritage Center on the Capitol Campus has been specifically designed to take advantage of views which will be seriously degraded by 7 story buildings on the isthmus.

91. The Capitol Campus Design Advisory Committee and many state legislators oppose this project, which degrades the beauty of the Capitol Campus. Going ahead with this development jeopardizes our legislative relationships

92. After decades of cooperative, give and take with the state government, this city council is squandering that good will, which may affect all Olympians in the future.

93. Pedestrian crossings on 4th and 5th avenue are already overtaxed and dangerous in this bottleneck area. The addition of 141 units of housing, will increase pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic. In addition, the constant crossing of pedestrians will further slow traffic in the area. The city’s traffic analysis did not take the increase in pedestrian traffic into account.

94. Rezoning does not guarantee anything worthwhile will actually be built. We may end up with a hole in the ground if the developer’s financing falls through, a prospect which is increasingly likely as the housing market and economy continue to slump.

95. It is questionable whether Triway truly has respect for the will of the community and Olympia’s political process, i.e. his statement to the Sitting Duck that “In my country, this would be done in a week.”

96. We shouldn’t give into blackmail, i.e., Triway’s lawyer threatening at the Planning Commission hearing to build a three-story office building on the site if it is not rezoned.

97. The design review process does not offer much opportunity for public input. The time to act is now, to stop the rezone.

98. Heritage Park and Capitol Lake are enhanced by the openness and natural light in the area; high rise buildings would darken the atmosphere and the character of this public resource.

99. According to A Pattern Language, access to water is also an important planning consideration: “People have a fundamental yearning for great bodies of water… the land immediately along the water’s edge must be preserved for common use.”

Special thanks to Kevin Laird, Thad Curtz, Bonnie Jacobs, Kris Goddard, Pat Tassoni, Sue Lean, Rachel Newman, Bob Jacobs, KTeeO, Tovah Rudawski, Bert Whitlock, Emily Ray, Phoebe Blanding, Jerry Reilly, People for a Participatory City, Friends of the Waterfront, Olympia 20/20 and others for help in compiling this list.