Cascadia Report

Running for Seattle City Council

Update: A lot has happened since this post was published in 2011. I lost my election, focused on my family, and became a U.S. diplomat posted to Mexico, Vietnam, India, Somalia, and Kenya. Some thoughts along the way were captured at www.bradmeacham.com. But I remain firmly rooted in Cascadia and believe many others think of the region in a similar way. I've maintained this site in the hopes that it would grow when the time was right. Join me!

---

After years of reporting and opining about this region, it's time to act: I'm running for Seattle City Council.

I'm a Seattle native and I believe my city isn't living up to its potential at the heart of Cascadia. We’re hindered by poor decision-making and political infighting, while posturing on the city council costs taxpayers and threatens our future. Becoming a parent made me realize that I could either hope for things to get better or take on the challenge myself. 

Here's the gist of my platform. Let's create modern urban neighborhoods where people want to live and work, where growth and density are incentivized with sidewalks and other amenities, fast internet, and vibrant businesses. Let's connect these neighborhoods with transit so residents don't need a car. Let's make the city inclusive and care for those who are currently being left behind.

Anyone who reads this blog knows that I don't have all the answers. I am interested in good ideas and in finding ways to work together to bring them to life. Please follow my campaign and share your thoughts. This blog will remain, of course, and you can find me at www.bradmeacham.com.

Wanted: Creative solutions to local problems

I published the following op-ed in the Nov. 11, 2010 edition of The Seattle Times. Please let me know what you think in the comments.

In the wake of last week's election, I've heard people across Seattle asking: What were Americans thinking? Pundits say the results were a call for smaller government and fewer services. Gov. Chris Gregoire even responded by pledging an "all cuts" budget.

But voters aren't stupid. They want government to creatively solve problems and deliver results especially at the local level, where it's most tangible.

The vast majority of my neighbors in Southeast Seattle are concerned about the basics. Most don't have time to regularly attend community meetings because they're fully occupied working long hours and taking care of their families. They elect representatives to make sensible decisions about complex issues for them.

What comes to mind first is creating jobs and opportunity. Even during the boom times leading up to the 2008 crash, the population of the city of Seattle was growing and the number of jobs was falling — a combination that eventually will mean more taxes on individuals to support city services.

To avoid that result, we need to make it easier to do business here. It shouldn't take years to get a building permit through approvals and opening a new business should be straightforward.

What we want depends on the incentives

During a breakfast presentation today in Seattle, the author Joel Kotkin delivered an optimistic forecast for our region that left everyone with a spring in their step. I enjoyed the message, but wonder if we took the right lesson.

The talk was in support of Kotkin's new book The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050. (His previous book The City: A Global History was engaging so I was eager to hear him.) Kotkin is a cheerleader for suburbs and thinks growing population due to high immigration rates means America's prospects are good. (More on that on his Web site.) The Seattle area is particularly well poised to prosper from its position on the Pacific Rim, partly because, as he put it, Seattle is "like Portland with an economy." (On cue, laughs in the room.)

But he lost me when it came to describing the sort of land use and development we'll need to accommodate more people in 2050. He said that 86% of Americans now "want" to live in detached, single-family homes, a category that presumably includes everything from mansions on five-acre lots to tall, narrow urban infill homes.  More than once he said that today's planners are going too far by "forcing" people to live too densely.

When congestion is your friend

Vancouver's congested streets can be maddening -- unless, as the blog Hugeasscity notes, you're a pedestrian or bicyclist. But will that frustration translate into momentum for policy change?

As someone passing through I typically must drive. SkyTrain is great you go where it goes but my recent trips took me to UBC or on detours between Whistler and Seattle, where there aren't feasible transit options. The vast majority of Lower Mainland residents are the in the same situation until land use policy puts more housing within striking distance of transit (or walking or biking).

Vancouver's clogged street grid doesn't necessarily make the case for congestion pricing, at least off the downtown peninsula. Seattle's hills and water are a much better testing ground for combining a) alternative forms of travel with b) tolling that varies with usage. If the goal is to use congestion pricing to make more efficient use of finite resources, Seattle would be a great place to start.

Maybe we're not so 'livable'

Here in Cascadia we're used to hearing that this is among the world's most "livable" places.  It's a squishy, feel-good moniker that obscures our challenges.

Vancouver regularly tops international rankings and Portland is a media darling for its hipster qualities and great refreshments. One shared feature of supposedly "livable" cities is that not many people live in them, notes FT columnist Michael Skapinker.

See also: Decisions that made a great city

Less than 2 million people live within the city limits of Vancouver, Portland and Seattle combined (the city of Seattle just topped 600K) and none rank among the top cities based on global business. I'd prefer to encourage more economic and cultural growth within Cascadia's cities since without clear benchmarks it's unclear how much progress we're making.

None of this takes away from the latest top-cities listings.  Monocle magazine's list of top 25 ranks Vancouver as 14 and includes just one U.S. city (Honolulu at 11). Tokyo (3), Fukuoka (16) and Kyoto (22) make the list -- but there's no Osaka, Yokohama or Sendai, which are all just as comfortable. It's editorial whim.

 

How do we get better art

Here's a question to stoke some intra-Cascadia rivalry: is Vancouver's art scene better than Seattle's?

Is writer Jen Graves right? I'm not sure how much of her piece is just the "grass is greener," but the provocation is much needed.  She offers a few sensible suggestions, starting with celebrating our region's work in our museums:

The Henry should step up its game by exhibiting all six short listers rather than just the winner, while the Seattle, Tacoma, and Portland art museums should all start reconceptualizing the meaning of "regional," like the Henry is doing, and quick. (The "inclusion" of such places as Idaho and Montana in Tacoma Art Museum's biennial, for instance, reflects a fake constituency and has fake results. Art is now and has always been a city game. The art "region" is along or connected to the I-5 corridor, and in most ways, Seattle has more in common with Los Angeles than Spokane.

Cutting Amtrak at exactly the wrong time

It looks like the Canadian national bureaucracy is STILL dragging its feet on adding needed rail service between Vancouver and Seattle. Meanwhile in Washington, legislators are planning to cut improvements that would make Amtrak faster and more reliable, while allowing more trains in the future.

Every dollar is important in tough budgetary times like these. So why are improvements to I-5 going ahead -- even without tolling mechanisms to lower the implicit subsidy for roads and private automobiles? We should be adding tolls in areas with "freeway" improvements while investing to make rail travel more competitive.

Instead travel options are limited. Canada wants U.S. taxpayers to cover the cost of a Canadian customs agent, despite the expected financial windfall a second daily train would bring to B.C.  For now it looks like a second train will cross the border each day during the winter Olympics -- but not after.

A smart solution to the Viaduct problem (finally!)

I published the following op-ed in today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Let me know what you think by leaving a comment.

For nearly two years, our community has been working steadily toward a consensus solution that would replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with something that will serve all our needs. Having come so far, it's critical that we not lose our footing now.

The Municipal League is pleased with the sound process set up by Gov. Chris Gregoire, King County Executive Ron Sims and Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels after voters turned down both a tunnel and a new viaduct in early 2007. A group of stakeholders representing broad interests was set up to develop and analyze a series of options. They used a framework of principles designed to produce a recommendation that everyone could agree with.

Now, after months of work and increasing media scrutiny, it's natural that some participants feel weary. Yet overall, this process has been open-minded, transparent and genuinely inviting of public input.

No tax increase by Port of Seattle

The Port of Seattle Commission recently reversed itself, voting to not increase its property-tax levy on the homeowners throughout King County. Why?

The Seattle Times credited testimony by the Municipal League and individual taxpayers at a Commission hearing. Here's an op-ed we wrote that previously appeared in the paper:

Port of Seattle: Don't increase tax revenues

By Bradley Meacham and Bruce Carter

The Municipal League of King County recommends the Port of Seattle commission reduce the $8.1 million increase in the proposed 2009 real estate tax levy.

A league committee monitoring the affairs of the Port of Seattle has concluded the increase is not warranted, especially considering the financial meltdown that is dramatically afflicting business activity and real property values in King County.

Argument against another Seattle airport

Sea-Tac's third runway just opened , after two decades and a billion dollars. Now some say the Seattle area needs another airport.

But we're better off encouraging a single major airport (especially if it's conveniently connected to high-speed rail for Vancouver-Portland travelers). Consider Heathrow and this letter from the Economist:

SIR – The Economist noted that since 1990 the route network at Heathrow has decreased, while transfer traffic has increased (“The right side of the argument”, November 8th). However, the subsequent claim that transfer passengers are of limited economic value is incorrect. It is in fact evidence of the market forces caused by a capacity-constrained airport.

Slots at Heathrow trade for up to £25m ($37m), clear evidence that given new capacity, the network would grow. Until Heathrow is permitted additional capacity, airlines will understandably make the rational, economic decision to focus the limited slots available to them on the most profitable routes. This is tenable in the short term, but over the long term Britain’s economy will suffer from not being able to offer direct links to cities in the growing economies of India and China. Around two-thirds of routes at Heathrow are supported by transfer passengers who make up 25-40% of the people who fly on them. Without these passengers, major business destinations such as Bangalore, Chennai and Seattle would all disappear.

It is naive to think transfer passengers do not offer any wider economic benefits—the direct, global links that these passengers support are Britain’s gateway to the world economy. Heathrow is Britain’s only hub airport and a vital economic asset. If Heathrow is to stay in the global league, then a third runway is vital to keep it, and by extension Britain, competitive.

A call for better bus service

It's been a while but I can't stay quiet any longer. The reason? There's a report out today with a couple dozen recommendations to improve Metro Transit. 

The biggest deal is calling for a Metro -- which serves the 1.9 million people of King County -- to design its service around where people live and work rather than outmoded political compromises. Currently 80 percent of new service is divided among south and east King County, with the remainder going to Seattle, which has more demand and transit-oriented development.

The report was produced by a citizen committee organized by the Municipal League. (Yes, I'm biased since I'm League chair.)  It's just in time, too, because Metro needs more funding in order to meet soaring demand.  Most of the debate over transit around Seattle has been about light rail, streetcars and ferries. We also should get a better return on investment from our main existing transit service.

Much of the stuff in the report should be obvious: Metro needs more transparency about route performance, costs and accountability.  Hopefully shining a light on the agency and calling for the basics will help.

Extend the streetcar line now

I stopped by a forum on the proposed extensions of Seattle's streetcar yesterday afternoon -- and heard more objections to the idea of a citywide network than vision to make such a system work.

At question is the idea of extending Seattle's stunted 1.3-mile line to actually go somewhere. It could be a viable transportation system that would encourage development and make owning and driving a car in the city less essential.

Financing and design are legitimate obstacles that can be solved. Public support will follow -- just as in Toronto and countless other cities where streetcars are commonplace.

What we shouldn't do is talk this issue to death at endless public forums. I didn't hear one concern that couldn't be met. Losing parking on local streets? More people will take streetcars and walk. Cannibalizing bus service? We need to invest in more, better bus service too. One man talked about efficient express bus service in Vancouver as an example of what we should do. Fine, but that and streetcars aren't mutually exclusive.

By all means, get citizen input on the route and design. Then let's build it.

The best way to get more, faster Web access

Just after paying my $145 monthly telecom bill, I noticed this Wall Street Journal story about how cities nationwide are trying to promote faster broadband Internet service.

The problem is that much of the U.S. is falling behind other industrialized economies in terms of Web access speed and cost, which potentially hinders innovation -- not to mention convenience. How is it that high-speed Internet is just a quarter as costly in Japan and even Canada has faster service?

Washington in particular lags behind. See this post. Tacoma has a municipal network and this year Gov. Gregoire signed a law to begin planning broader system. But those seem like very small steps.

Several U.S. cities are investing in their own networks, against the wishes of telecom firms that nearly have a stranglehold. According to the article, telecoms seem to have two main arguments. The local projects are an unfair competitive threat, they say, and the projects will be more costly than local governments project. (Here's the latest from Qwest.)

Should local governments here be doing more to help?

Which buildings should we save

It's easy to argue that one of Seattle's darkest days was when the Music Hall theater was destroyed downtown to make way for a parking lot.

But it's usually harder to define what buildings deserve protection. There are a few ideas in this article in the Seattle P-I.

One point in the comment thread made sense to me:

Rather our approach to "preservation", why not adopt a simple "ancient light" law. If a window has had sunlight for 50 (let's say) or more years then that sunlight can not be taken away. Period, it works in other cities.

Giving praise where it's due

If you're curious about what kind of development will shape Seattle's future, increasingly the one place to turn for free, timely information is The Stranger's blog.

At a time when metropolitan dailies like The Seattle Times are almost giving up on coverage of neighborhoods, the blog is a huge help to anyone who cares about Cascadia's biggest city but can't be a full-time gadfly.

Here a few random recent posts:

Today's examines plans for major growth along the new light rail line.

Coverage of in-fill in single-family neighborhoods.

A glimpse of an iconic tower that may alter the skyline.

Coverage of the design for one of the city's first "subway" stations.

Dubious plans for Amazon's new headquarters the booming South Lake Union neighborhood.

B.C. may boost exports of trash

Vancouver wants to dramatically boost its Washington-bound exports of one product it has too much of: trash.

And why not? Canadians would pay more to cover the cost of sending trash trains to a landfill on the Washington side of the Columbia River Gorge, helping the economy of rural Klickitat County, according to the Seattle P-I. At the landfill the trash would be turned into sellable energy.

The shipments would begin just ahead of the supposedly eco-friendly Olympics and, predictably, the idea is already riling residents who live along the prospective route of trash trains. Whistler and Seattle already export their trash elsewhere in the region and other reports suggest there may, in fact, be other B.C. alternatives.

But the richest part of the P-I article is the appeal to regional sympathy by one of the proponents:

Marvin Hunt, a councilor in Surrey, B.C., and chairman of the Metro Vancouver Waste Management Committee, said the garbage shipment is just temporary until a new facility is ready in the province.

"This is the Northwest. We feel like this is all family here in Cascadia," Hunt said.

"We have a little problem right now, and when you have a problem, you ask your brothers and sisters to help you out."

While I've been away

This site has been on temporary hiatus recently while I've been spending time with the Municipal League of King County, a nonpartisan group that aims make public policy in the Seattle area more efficient.

Check out me wearing my Municipal League hat in this interview on Comcast:

The event I mention is the League's annual Civic Awards. This year's is at the Olympic Sculpture Park on April 24.

It's time to charge for road use

I published an op-ed in the Seattle Times today advocating variable pricing for roads as a method to lessen congestion.

The idea of charging more during crowded times and less when fewer cars are on the road is nothing new to me (see this and this). But it's a big deal that the Municipal League, a venerable nonpartisan good-government group, is now on board. Here's from the piece:

In the past, tolls have been imposed to support construction of major projects. We at the Municipal League of King County support a broader use of tolling to increase traffic flow through congested corridors, while at the same time recovering costs from those using the roads. This is how we price other goods and services when there is limited supply.

As I mention, there are plenty of details to be worked out. The key, as I wrote, is providing alternatives so that additional fees are fair and that everyone benefits. That means adding enough buses, making them faster and more frequent so that transit is a viable alternative.

The key is balancing the market so that transit is a realistic option. Right now we're massively subsidizing travel in single-occupant vehicles. A smart pricing system would make better use of infrastructure and have the positive benefits I mention in the article.

Hooray for the carbon tax

This week British Columbia passed North America's first carbon tax, a big step toward tying sustainability, transportation and market forces. Why can't the rest of Cascadia build on the example?

The tax has been in the works for a while but I missed the passage until I arrived in Vancouver Friday night and noticed it was all over the papers and TV. Looking back, I can't find a single reference in mainstream Seattle-area media.

This policy is huge news because it stands to begin discouraging emissions while making taxation more progressive. Here are some interesting first takes:

-- There are some links to more details and praise for the potential environmental impact here.

-- The business community is glad that there's finally a law, according to yesterday's Globe and Mail.

-- The Tyee looks at whether the tax is fair, here.

-- Progressive Economics points out some flaws yet ends up praising the idea here.

Coming soon: Seattle-Northern B.C. connection

Seattle is about to get its first nonstop flights to northern British Columbia -- another step toward integrating Cascadia.

Alaska Airlines will fly to Prince George, a city 500 miles north of Vancouver at the heart of B.C. timber and mining industry. Unless you like looong drives, the only way to get there now is on the three daily Air Canada flights from YVR.

The convenience almost makes me pine for the days when I was a reporter covering Weyerhaueser and the cross-border timber industry.

More importantly, it suggests that there's demand for this sort of regional travel. The news slipped by while I was dizzy about new nonstops to China, Germany, Mexico and France.

No news south of the Canadian border today

Americans hear almost nothing about politics in Canada. Maybe it's mutual.

I found just one story in B.C. media about today's caucuses in Washington. There's some explanation of the arcane process but little about what the race means for the region:

University of Victoria graduate student Jeremy Wood, wearing a "Canadians For Obama" T-shirt, said "my friends and I came here to see if our support for Obama was based on rock star adulation or if there was something more to it. We arrived at 6:30 in the morning and talked to people lined up. One 17-year-old kid told me he had never been interested in politics until he heard about Obama.

"I've never seen a lineup like this for a political event. It's a social movement. We Canadians had Trudeaumania. But this is something else," said the 36-year-old masters of public administration student.

What Super Tuesday meant for Cascadia

The quasi-national primary on Tuesday puts votes from the Northwest in play far more than anyone expected.

For one thing, the split Clinton/Obama results make Washington's caucuses this Saturday meaningful. The Web is aflutter with news of impending visits and campaign spin.

Here's the most interesting analysis of the longer term picture.

Now there's talk that even Oregon's May primary could make a difference.

Fed up with cattle class? Try yoga to China

If you like in-flight yoga, it's a good day. You'll soon be able to fly nonstop to China from Seattle on an airline that offers that amenity.

The new flight to Beijing on Hainan Airlines is the latest increase between the two countries and the latest of several new international offerings from Sea-Tac. This one is probably a boost for tourism and some business travelers.

But flights four times a week hardly makes Seattle the Cascadia gateway for the China market. Vancouver has daily nonstops to Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong -- with 30 a week to Hong Kong alone.

What happens to Cascadia when U.S. wanes

I missed President Bush's State of the Union speech tonight because I was reading about how much the world has changed since he took office.

It's worth reading this article from the Sunday New York Times Magazine, which shows how the world is dividing into three superpowers (U.S., China and the E.U.) that will increasingly compete for the growing "second world" countries like India, Turkey, Brazil and Vietnam. There are plenty of statistics and anecdotes showing how this trend accelerated during the past eight years and will continue to do so.

I find myself thinking immediately about what this means for Cascadia. If the bellicose behavior of the U.S. over the last several years hurt America's stature, and if Canada is so small as to be irrelevant globally, what about our region? Apparently there's more trade in the Japan-India-Australia triangle than across the Pacific and more Chinese study in Europe than the U.S. Does it mean no more booming ports in Seattle and Vancouver; fewer Chinese professionals who fondly recall living in the Northwest during school?

The article offers a series of ideas for the next couple of presidents. But this region needs leaders who appreciate the examples of other countries and our peer metro areas around the world. It needs vigorous diplomacy on a regional level. And it needs more-sustainable development here to insulate us from potential global shocks through more efficient transportation, better use of resources and improvement of the cultural draws that make this part of the world a desirable place to live.

I'll try to work this out some here in the coming months. What ideas am I missing?

Making room for people and vineyards

Planners in the Portland area are divvying up land for long-term agricultural use and for development. The idea is to get beyond arguments over the region's growth management boundaries.

Farmers and developers -- often at odds on land-use issues -- say the change could provide long-term stability by preserving large blocks of the best farmland while making it clear where cities will grow.

"Once Metro adopts urban reserves -- boom -- we know where growth is going to occur," said Jim Johnson, land use and water planning coordinator for the state Agriculture Department.

Gee, why don't we trying something similar here? Instead the top story in today's Seattle Times is about a sweetheart development deal in rural King County. It seems like forcing development -- without local buy-in or a way to pay for infrastructure -- is bound to backfire.

We have money -- but no good way to send it

Sending money between the U.S. and Canada ranks with border delays and underdeveloped transportation infrastructure as obstacles facing regionally minded Cascadia citizens.

Recently I tried to pay a bill in Canada by sending C$113 from Seattle to Victoria. Apparently I ran afoul of post-9/11 inconvenience, anti-money-laundering worries and maybe even technology. I can accept some confusion, but there's got to be a better way.

When I went to a Washington Mutual branch asking for a money order, payable in Canadian funds, the teller looked at me like I was crazy. Bank of America said they could order a money order in about a week. Western Union was willing to help me for a hefty fee, but only if I wired the cash to an individual, who then would have to pick up the cash at another Western Union outlet.

Desperately seeking a good money changer, I called the Canadian consulate in Seattle. The single main phone number leads to choices in the automated system that all lead to a dead ends. After nearly three minutes of messages in English and French, I picked tourism. Then the message said there is no longer a tourism office and suggested calling immigration. The immigration line said they no longer take telephone inquiries.

My solution was to find a friend who happens to have an account in a Canadian bank -- a move he took post-9/11 in order to handle details related to his Whistler rental. He says his bank puts a 45-business-day hold on USD checks (even if he writes it to himself) so he's resigned to simply planning way ahead. It's nearly enough to keep us on our respective sides of the border.

Rail deal a big step toward mobility

The Seattle area took a big step toward better mobility with a deal to put a railroad line through the Eastside under public ownership.

The old freight line is the only unused corridor straight through the booming suburbs, so preventing it from being sold in pieces was step one. Now there needs to be a plan to add transit and a trail, in conjunction with tolling on the existing roads.

Most important, the region needs to encourage future demand for transportation to grow around this corridor. Transit shouldn't simply serve the density that exists now. After all, today's Eastside grew up around structures that were planned in the 1950s.

Don't think the rail route would work as transportation? A project in Bellevue was announced just this week that would locate thousands of residents and workers within walking distance. In Renton the route could be connected to the Sounder trains, light rail and density near Southcenter. In the north, the corridor serves Woodinville and Snohomish -- booming areas where focusing development around transit infrastructure makes more sense than massive new roads.

Consider this report about one way transit could be added sooner rather than later.

Doing right thing for the waterfront (finally)

Politicians and media appear to be coming around (finally) to the idea that Seattle's waterfront viaduct shouldn't be replaced with another freeway.

Cascadia Report made the case last winter for a combination of transit and comprehensive street improvements to replace the earthquake-damaged eyesore. Gov. Gregoire and Mayor Nickels were among those who poo-pooed the idea by insisting that any replacement had to accommodate the same number of vehicles as the current viaduct.

Now, Gregoire has changed her mind. Several agencies have pledged to work together for a comprehensive fix. Today even the Seattle Times editorial board -- a mostly suburban group that generally supports roads over transit -- came out in favor of transit + road fixes.

It's about time. Now let's get to work on a long-term fix that values the waterfront heart of the region's biggest metro area.

Death and life of great cities

A few weeks ago, during a long weekend in New York, I found myself wandering Manhattan on a Monday. All the usual museums were closed so I tried a small gem of an exhibit on the life and accomplishments of Jane Jacobs.

Jacobs is the activist who helped save swaths of Manhattan from freeways and urban renewal through the 1960s. She's often credited with the basic idea that walkable neighborhoods inhabited by residents are healthier than impersonal housing projects on "super blocks."

It's a great lesson that's been internalized by planners worldwide. But I couldn't help think the pendulum has swung too far. Instead of protesting for strong neighborhoods it seems neighborhood activism -- often under the guise of Jacobs' lessons -- is simply against development, period.

This describes Seattle, where investment in new buildings in a close-in neighborhood is scorned. The Seattle P-I wrote in sympathy of neighbors of a University District coffee shop who didn't want a parking lot developed because a new building would cast shade on a patio! Never mind the benefit of more residents, workers or customers in the neighborhood. Of course, there's also some backlash to development in Portland and Vancouver.

Even in New York, the protest and NIMBY movement is strong. I choose to remember the row of old two-story buildings being torn down in favor of the Santiago Calatrava-designed transit hub. Instead of hand-wringing, the New York Post brushed off concerns of the tenants, calling the buildings "scuzzy."

So where's the middle ground? I'd vote for transparent development rules and design review. But most important is leadership that can make a clear case for what the city gains from development.

Critics of tall Seattle buildings have it backward

Critics of plans for taller buildings in Seattle's South Lake Union area have it exactly backward.

If anything, the city should encourage more building in the area, creating demand for transit rather than encouraging sprawl. Instead critics want to soak the developer to pay more into a fund to create "affordable" housing.

Now, zoning in the area requires special permission to build even 12 stories. Why not require that buildings be at least that tall? Set design review standards, sure. But let's build the workplaces for thousands of employees and new residents.

What's wrong with a supposedly sweetheart deal between developers and the mayor, as long as the city gains? Among the benefits: More housing supply in the city should lower overall prices and make transportation options feasible.

Of course the city should negotiate to get the best terms in this area, but better those rules be streamlined and transparent to encourage more, better building instead of hinder it. Unfortunately the potential benefits are totally lost in today's story and the reader comments.

Missing the Olympics 'bounty'

It's refreshing to see a story in the Seattle Times today about how Washington risks losing out on the economic benefits of the 2010 Olympics.

Cascadia Report has mentioned this issue many times, including here and here (and don't forget the Olympics category here).

There are a few problems with the story:

-- Border hassles are a big factor. But what about the falling value of the U.S. dollar?

Both sides are noticing a drop in travel. From January to April of this year, same-day visitors from the U.S. to B.C. dropped by almost 13 percent, Periwal said.

Travel to B.C. is a lot less interesting to Americans when their money buys 20 percent less than it did just months ago. On Sunday night, it took 10-15 minutes to cross the border southbound while northbound waits were over an hour. It was the reverse on Friday evening, at the end of a day of post-Thanksgiving sales.

-- Canada isn't necessarily more feel-good about the border:

G. Kathleen Hill, deputy consul general at the U.S. Consulate in Vancouver, pointed to a fundamental difference between border priorities: While the U.S. priority is security, Canadians value the free flow of goods and people, she said.

Try telling that to each driver with Canadian plates entering B.C. ahead of me on Friday. They had to open each car door so the border agent could search their vehicle. (Of course, U.S. agents are no strangers to over-the-top screening.)

-- Roads aren't the only solution:

Driving is unlikely to get dramatically more pleasant, especially when you factor in worsening congestion along I-5 and throughout Vancouver. That makes boosting train service an obvious opportunity to boost mobility. Amtrak currently offers a single train and four buses each day between Seattle and Vancouver. Why isn't B.C. funding improvements north of the border to accommodate more trains?

Cascadia as global outsourcing way station

The Tyee has an interesting article questioning the benefits for the Vancouver area of a new software research center in Richmond, B.C. There are some smart comments too.

To me, this seems like a trend B.C. should support. Obviously the U.S. and Canada are very different labor markets, especially for skilled technology workers with Asian passports. Even if the new research center doesn't mean more Canadian hires, every Asian worker will make B.C. more fertile for technology and, over time, pay off by making it a more dynamic business environment.

Urban planning overlooked in Seattle

The booming Seattle area is struggling to define itself. That's why it's curious that urban design seems overlooked in the latest regional awards by the American Institute of Architects.

For last Monday's ceremony there were nearly 200 entries for designs, from residential to industrial. But in the category of urban planning: nothing, not a single one for built or unbuilt work. (There was also nothing for historical preservation.)

Here's how our tipster put it:

In a city that's bursting at the seams, with the number of public projects that have been proposed, shot down, restarted, re-voted on -- how is there nothing in the urban design category? Scary.

Surely the numbers partly reflect who's commissioning the projects. That makes rewarding quality design even more important.

Election results (literally) hurt

My arches still ache from traipsing to eight election parties last night in downtown Seattle in To Boot loafers.

The vote tallies were depressing (and today's stock-market sell off and continuing slump in the U.S. dollar didn't help the mood). A few takeaways:

-- People don't want "politics" and compromise. I held my nose and voted for transit and roads -- Prop. 1 -- arguing that the package was better than doing nothing. Evidently there was just too much there for everyone to dislike.

-- Too few bothered to participate. Maybe Prop. 1 was so uninspiring that voters dismissed the whole election, which gave more power to obstructionists. How else to explain looney results like the victory of no-tax I-960 and the failure of simple majority for school levies?

-- The Establishment needs a shakeup. Everyone from council members to the biggest companies got slammed. On Prop. 1, they spent too much capital on TV ads and slogans ahead of the election, and not enough on honing the package and then inspiring the rest of us that it made sense. The region's leadership vacuum is clearer than ever.

So what's next? For transportation, the first priority should be reorganizing transit planning to align growth with infrastructure. Then we need transit plans with a) incentives to change lifestyle patterns and b) infrastructure that will start to meet growing demand.

Hopefully there's more to celebrate after the next vote.

From one dark place to another -- nonstop

A day after the onslaught of standard time, it's hard to imagine anyone wanting to fly nonstop to Germany. But thanks to Lufthansa at least Seattleites (and anyone doing international business) will have the option.

The Sea-Tac-to-Franfurt nonstop announced today is the latest increase in air service since the Port of Seattle lowered its fees to attract more routes. That's the right sort of subsidy -- a targeted incentive that mulitplies the economic benefit. Recent new flights include to Mexico City and Paris.

There were rumors that Sea-Tac was courting a nonstop to Munich (Vancouver and Portland already have Frankfurt flights -- Portland, thanks to a package of tourism incentives). Lest anyone misconstrue the addition, note that Lufthansa also announced a host of new flights from Canada today.

When the flights begin in March, Seattle may enjoy the best connections to Europe it's ever had. (True, Aeroflot ended its nonstop to Moscow. But Sea-Tac will have daily scheduled service to five business centers: London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam and Copenhagen.)

Sausage-making over farm subsidies

The Omnivore's Dilemma is playing out now in Congress over the latest package of farm subsidies.

In an excellent op-ed in the New York Times, the author of that book makes a clear case against current agricultural policy. And then he turns the tables:

How could this have happened? For starters, farm bill critics did a far better job demonizing subsidies, and depicting commodity farmers as welfare queens, than they did proposing alternative — and politically appealing — forms of farm support. And then the farm lobby did what it has always done: bought off its critics with “programs.” For that reason “Americans who eat” can expect some nutritious crumbs from the farm bill, just enough to ensure that reform-minded legislators will hold their noses and support it.

Cascadia Report has found farm subsidies to be an easy target, for example here and here and here. We're waiting for some good policy to praise.

B.C. plan could actually cut gas emissions

Seattle announced Monday that it managed to cut emissions of greenhouse gases over the last 15 years. Too bad emissions from cars are bound to continue rising.

Meanwhile in British Columbia there's serious talk of a policy that could really make a difference: a carbon tax. The proposal would shift taxes to give incentives for lower emissions. It seems a lot more effective than just encouraging everyone to ride bicycles.

Washington and the Seattle area need to think along the same lines. This report includes a chart of Seattle's pollution sources and how hard it will be to make more progress. Next steps should be replacing the viaduct with transit and better streets and then nudging the region toward a more sustainable transportation network.

Wanted at Sea-Tac: Pride of place

How does Seattle greet visitors? If they get off a flight at Sea-Tac's gate N-15, the answer is with a dingy jetway that has a severely waterstained ceiling, discolored walls and wet wood between the floor joints.

The dark and crowded North Satellite terminal was a jarring change after my recent flight from the airy, modern facility in Toronto. Luckily flights from Canada clear U.S. customs before they take off so at least those passengers can avoid Sea-Tac's 70s-era international arrivals area in the South Satellite.

Sea-Tac's embarrassment is about more than aesthetics. With its new facilities, Vancouver is wooing Seattle fliers and more business because airlines prefer its new terminal. Each flight means thousands of dollars in economic benefit on the ground.

There's a comprehensive plan to remodel Sea-Tac -- eventually. There also are examples of how to use the space more efficiently. It wouldn't hurt to start with basics.

Why I'm voting for Transit and Roads

The tax package to fund transit and roads in the greater Seattle area, known as Prop. 1, is a compromise: there are details for everyone to hate. I may be holding my nose, but I'm voting yes.

Consider what the measure does: it raises $10.8 billion to add light rail, HOV lanes, streetcars, park-and-rides and other transit infrastructure. It also generates $7 billion to fix some road choke points and complete several missing links in the region's network, for example connecting 509 and 167 to I-5. It's far from the sole solution, but it's a start.

For more info, take a look at this map.

What would be better? Funding much more transit, completing the projects much faster and explicitly including congestion pricing in the financing mix. In fact, the most persuasive argument against the measure is that any investment in roads lessens incentives for transit and worsens global warming.

But politics is reality. There's a huge backlog of infrastructure projects in the region and chipping away at it takes regional buy-in -- a process that in this case took five years. The dense areas of the region can't afford to pay for all the transit this area needs (remember the monorail?). To build support, there needs to be something for people who help pay but wouldn't directly benefit. Even with this package, congestion will still create a growing incentive to use transit; as alternatives start becoming available policies can be shifted to encourage even more use.

Assuming the measure passes, the next step should be reorganizing the governments that oversee the region's transportation to execute more efficiently. There will still be chances during the planning process to modifiy specific projects. These are all big challenges, not deal breakers.

Writing that captures the city

There's a nice elegy in the Seattle P-I today marking the 25th anniversary of the death of the poet Richard Hugo.

The author of "The Real West Marginal Way" captured the city in a way that may not be possible now that the area is more grown up. That makes his contribution more worth remembering than ever.

One place that builds on his example is the Hugo House literary center (where I serve on the board). From the P-I piece:

Most of all, Hugo, our hometown poet, tells us that writing matters: "It's a way of saying you and the world have a chance." In these past 25 years, multitudes of writers working in all sorts of genres have gathered in Seattle. We're now not only a bookish city, we're a city where the raw ore of language is formed into literature. All along the ridges and valleys, writers are working away, word by word, creating the drafts that we'll see later caught between the smooth, glimmering covers of books. It's the kind of industry that would have impressed Richard Hugo.

A crazy way to get around a city

People in Toronto have a crazy way of getting around the city: streetcars.

After a few days of enviously watching streetcars move through traffic-clogged streets (they have right of way), I finally snapped this picture on King Street.

There's momentum to expand streetcars in Cascadia, though it seems to be a question whether they could work in a city bigger than Portland.

Seattle has a tiny starter line and an expansion is a small part of the transit package, Prop. 1, on the ballot next month in the Puget Sound area.

Making a city for residents, not tourists

I just noticed this article in Vancouver magazine, pointing out the need to make the city serve its residents rather than just tourists, planners and the people who create "most-livable city" lists.

The writer finds fault with Vancouver's regional government system (exactly what Seattle lacks):

One of the biggest obstacles is political: planners are king here because our politicians allow them to be. Our at-large municipal system—unlike the ward system, with defined constituencies, which you find in most major cities—gives a free pass to city councillors. We select our council from a list of 100-plus candidates every three years, and they thank us by answering to “the city at large”—not to the widower in Strathcona trying to save the local seniors’ centre from destruction, not to the South Main sculptor trying to find a spot for his public art, not to the young couple in Yaletown trying to get a playground built near their condo. Such quotidian concerns become the domain of bureaucrats and enforcers, while politicians turn their attention to the “big picture” stuff like EcoDensity, Civil City and the Olympics.

By contrast, the Seattle area has the worst of both worlds. The Seattle city council is elected city wide (so they're not accountable to neighborhoods) yet there's no effective regional government.

The Hamptons, Aspen and ... Vancouver

Think the Seattle condo market is going out of hand? Consider Vancouver.

"I summer in THE HAMPTONS... I winter in ASPEN. My home, THE RITZ-CARLTON, VANCOUVER." That's the seductive tag line in a full-page ad on the back of the A-section of Thursday's Globe and Mail Ontario edition.

The condos, which run $2.25 million to $10 million, are part of a skyscraper building boom that will give Vancouver a tall skyline. The Web site address says much: vancouversturn.com.

They're also part of a trend that has made Vancouver Canada's priciest housing market. Meanwhile, Toronto -- a big presumed audience for the Ritz-Carlton -- is a bargain. Ads on bus shelters in downtown Toronto last week promised two-bedroom luxury condos near the financial district starting at $159,000.

Cost of driving makes ferry feasible

A boat owner wants to start ferrying commuters between Seattle and Gig Harbor for $800 a month.

The reason the idea isn't totally laughable is that new tolls, increasing road congestion and higher gas prices are beginning to reflect the actual cost of driving:

Dividing $800 by 20 workdays a month comes out to $40 a day. He said with the price of gas, the tolls on the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and parking in downtown Seattle, the ferry wouldn't be much more expensive than driving — and a lot less stressful.

A transit system that makes a profit

The Seattle area needs a variety of measures to fix its transportation woes (light rail, buses, streetcars, etc). Never mind that many people are waiting for a perfect, inexpensive, painless solution.

Instead, consider what works in Amsterdam:

Within the center of Amsterdam, trams are the kings of the roads; there are very few bus lines that travel strictly within the center, and parking is a hassle, discouraging driving. Taking the tram is easy because of the multitude of lines, speed, comfort, frequency, and affordable price.

Providing a practical alternative to driving alone (and lessening the incentives for driving) has led to increasing ridership, fewer accidents and -- get this -- a transit system that's even profitable. Of course, they had to start somewhere.

Ending homeless in Vancouver, Seattle

Seattle doesn't have anything like the Downtown Eastside, Vancouver's slum of addicts and homeless. But judging from the line outside a shelter on Belltown's 3rd Avenue Sunday, there's a serious poverty problem.

So what to do about it?

We could lament the disconnect between the poor on the streets and the rich inhabitants of new condo towers.

Prefer solutions? The Tyee ran a list of five ideas suggested recently in British Columbia. The ideas in the comment string seemed more promising (Evo Morales aside).

Consider instead King County's plan, which recognizes that money is only part of the solution and chances of upending modern capitalism are slim.

Loonie = greenback: Who wins and loses

Longing for the happy days of bargain meals, rooms and ski slopes in British Columbia? Get over it.

Today the U.S. and Canadian dollars reached parity for the first time since 1976. The greenback has slid more than 60 percent against the loonie in the last five years and there's every reason to think the trend will continue.

It's already clear that the situation is tricky for anyone who is easily confused by U.S. and Canadian coins. I remember using Queen Elizabeth quarters and bills at Safeway in south Seattle as late as the early '80s. Those days may be back.

So who wins? Businesses in the U.S. that cater to Canadian customers. With their increased buying power, more Canadians will be traveling around Cascadia. The Victoria Clipper says traffic from Canada is up 25 percent this year. Things are surely looking up for discount shops and Costco stores just south of the U.S. border.

Potential losers come to mind more easily:

-- Anyone in Canada who depends on U.S. tourists. On Wednesday organizers of the 2010 Olympics unpersuasively insisted they won't be hurt because they've hedged their budget against currency changes. Too bad U.S. tourists haven't.

-- Anyone who depends on sales of Canadian lumber -- a huge slice of the B.C. economy, in other words. The current slump in demand from U.S. housing combined with the strong loonie will do what years of softwood tariffs couldn't: protect uncompetitive U.S. lumber producers.

The decisions that made a great city

Vancouver, often named one of the world's most livable cities, didn't get that way by accident. It took a series of not-so-obvious decisions.

A former British Columbia premier and a longtime urban planner just released a book describing their list of nine key turning points. Apparently their point is that currently planned transportation and development projects in Vancouver now threaten to undo many of those successes.

There's little in the book about Vancouver's "irritating and potentially dangerous sense of self-satisfaction," according to The Tyee. But the list is still fascinating:

-- Creation of a regional planning board after a 1948 flood forced officials to prepare for potential disasters.

-- The battle in the 1960s against plans to tear down urban neighborhoods and build in-city freeways.

-- Creation in the 1970s of an a regional reserve of agricultural land.

-- Regional planning based on neighborhood "livability" starting in the 1970s.

-- Remaking of the False Creek area after Expo 86.

-- A series of laws in the 1980s and 1990s mandating regional planning.

-- Creation of a regional transportation agency.

-- Shifting power and responsibilities to local government, away from the province.

Some of the elements of regional planning were also implemented in Portland. Seattle's list is much shorter, including regional water service decades ago, the package of 1960s reforms that created bus-transit system and cleaned up sewage, and the beginnings of regional transit in the 1990s.

Across Cascadia, the combining regional planning for infrastructure and local buy-in for neighborhood decisions still seems the best bet for coordinating new growth. It's worth considering this list of mistakes the book's authors came up with when asked by the Vancouver Sun:

1. Lack of authority in the regional government to enforce development near transit.

2. Slum clearance in the 1950s and 1960s.

3. Keeping the rural grid pattern south of the Fraser River, which makes density and transit difficult.

4. Allowing business-park sprawl.

5. Allowing the proliferation of underground malls that robbed streets of pedestrians.

6. Getting rid of the region's interurban rail and streetcars, which destroyed a comprehensive transit system and promoted more car use. The last interurban stopped in 1958.

7. Not containing the sprawl into farmland sooner.

8. Failing to consider sooner whether the region needed a vast rail system.

How to fix Seattle Center (and help Bumbershoot)

Pumping some new life into the Bumbershoot festival should be incentive for fixing the outmoded Seattle Center, the main park in the middle of the city.

Yes, some of this year's shows were great. On Saturday I loved The Gourds at Mural Amphitheater ("Starbucks Stage") and The Moth at Bagley Wright Theater. But The Shins' show suffered from awful sound in Memorial Stadium -- not to mention a lack of drinking water and super-strict airport-style crowd control.

At risk of sounding like a geezer, I have to say it used to be better. For $5 you could spend the day chancing across new music and art, plus maybe catch a great headliner. I'll always remember hearing Miles Davis at the old Opera House in 1987.

This year the walk-up tickets were $35, which kept the crowds in check. While fighting the economics of the music business is probably a lost cause, we can rejuvenate the place by remodeling the Seattle Center. (There's a simple summary of the options on this story.)

What can be done? Replace Memorial Stadium with a real amphitheater, replace the Fun Forest with usable green space, retool Key Arena and modernize the Center House. But don't stop there. Let's make the place accessible by running the new streetcar from South Lake Union past the Seattle Center to the existing line on the waterfront.

Extra open space, some better facilities and more efficient access would go a long way toward restoring the Seattle Center and Bumbershoot. That might even make them better than ever.

Longer delays at the border

There are reports that delays to cross the Canada-U.S. border are longer than ever, jeopardizing trade and tourism.

It's unclear if the waits are due to wise security measures, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff's "gut feeling" that a terrorist attack is on the way, or just bureaucracy. (Traffic is likely to back up on I-5 for the next two years thanks to construction at the Peace Arch.)

It would be nice to streamline the border-control procedures, not just postpone imposition of prohibitive rules -- especially before Olympics crowds arrive.