|
|
||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 5 users and 51 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: Who's new
|
Submitted by Peter Alden Stroble on Fri, 09/19/2008 - 9:11am.
My testimony at the City Council meeting was polarizing – exactly what I have written out against publicly here in the blogosphere. Clearly, and as the Olympian noted in their coverage of the hearing, people at the hearing in favor of the rezone did not like what I had to say. A large number of people confronted me in the lobby to express that they took offense to my testimony, and I tried my best to listen to them. I also pledged to post my testimony in a public place so that it could be scrutinized in an open and more democratizing way. So, I am posting this not to direct more attention to my argument, but to clarify it, and ultimately, to try to reconcile it with the community. I had no intention of offending anyone and I am sorry to those whom I did offend. Perception and reality can be different things, particularly at a public hearing, and what came out of my mouth wasn’t necessarily what was heard by the attendees of the hearing. Put another way, language is one thing, the interpretation of rhetoric by an impassioned audience is another. Perhaps Thad Curtz was right when he questioned whether my “rhetorical enthusiasm” was getting the better of me. You live and learn; I’ll chalk this one up to experience.
Submitted by Peter Alden Stroble on Fri, 09/12/2008 - 7:36am.
OLY 2012's Final Position Paper Endorsing the Urban Waterfront Rezone September 2008 Introduction OLY2012 is a group of independent citizens who care about downtown Olympia and hope to see it evolve in the best way possible for the community as a whole. Just as the community has been divided by the proposed Urban Waterfront Rezone, the OLY 2012 steering committee was torn on this issue initially. Back in March, our first straw vote on the issue amongst our initial six-person steering committee was split, 3-3. True to our mission of building broad-based community support, in early June we published what we hoped would be a "compromise" proposal for addressing the isthmus issue in our first position paper: Today's Vision for Downtown Olympia. The proposal called for opening views and park space through the center of the isthmus by purchasing and removing the Capitol Center Building while approving a modified rezone to enable the building of mid-rise, mixed-use structures on the western edge of the isthmus. Our hope was that our compromise proposal would unite the community, just as it united our initially-divided steering committee.
Submitted by Peter Alden Stroble on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 3:14pm.
Thad Curtz’s letter to the editor of the Olympian, published in this morning’s paper was composed of errant facts, unfair qualifications, and a misleading conclusion. After citing quantitative facts about turnout at the planning commission hearing being numerically in favor of opposing the rezone, Curtz concluded that “people don't want the Olympia City Council to give Triway a big tax break.” First, an incorrect fact: this rezone decision has nothing to do with giving tax breaks. This abatement is not unique to this project or rezone. All downtown multi-family housing is getting a tax break: low income housing has a permanent tax abatement; low cost housing is enjoying a 12-year abatement; and market-rate housing qualifies for an 8-year abatement. The State Legislature adopted this policy enabling cities to use abatements in recognition of the high cost of housing development. The city council passed this abatement years ago, and any downtown housing project proposed would qualify for it. So, unless the goal is to impede any and all housing in the urban core in order to keep these abatements from serving their purpose (including low income housing), this is not a valid reason to reject this rezone. And it has nothing to do with the rezone decision faced by the council.
Submitted by Burr on Wed, 08/20/2008 - 9:40am.
I just received this from the OLY 2012 Newsletter... Olympians Must Think Hard about What Makes the Best View By Peter Stroble Global Warming. Geo-Political Conflict. Epidemic Disease. The Rising Cost of Living. Famine. Obesity. Classism. Racism. Political Polarization. Social Entrenchment. The root cause of virtually every problem in our world today is Suburbia - enabled by our 20th century car culture. It's easy to simply blame it all on George W., kick back, and wait for Obama to make it all better. But until we take responsibility and change how we live at the community level, we shouldn't be pointing our fingers at anyone but ourselves. Density is the answer. It mitigates the threat of war and global warming by reducing our reliance on the oil-dependent automobile. It lowers our transportation costs, which lowers our overall cost of living. It enables us to eat more healthfully because less sprawl equals more local farmland. Density also brings communities together and helps address social ills. Suburbia has polarized our society; density will moderate it. In our suburban culture today it's easy for the haves to ignore the have-nots: homelessness isn't a problem to a typical suburbanite – it's merely a once-in-awhile inconvenience. Density offers us the opportunity to change this by bringing us closer to one another. But density is not as easy as simply building high rises in urban cores. In order to make a community function with density, the built environment must be designed with both humans and the outdoor environment in mind. This is what the term Smart Growth is all about. If we ignore the questions of where and how to accommodate more people living in our urban core, density could actually do more harm than good to our downtown. The activist and renowned urban critic
Submitted by davefromcarolina on Wed, 05/14/2008 - 9:56pm.
I'm new in town (9 months), and would love some background info on the Capitol Center Tower. I live near the Capitol, and cannot believe how such an ugly building could have been built right in the middle of one of the most beautiful scenes in North America. How could it be allowed to happen? I'm assuming money, greed, and stupidity is involved, but that thing belongs in the Guinness Book of the World's Ugliest Buildings. If someone could direct me to good resources of information I would be grateful. Also, why is it currently vacant? Has anyone thought about putting a private foundation together to buy the building and tear it down? If someone can also let me know how to sign up for e-mail notification on public meetings related to the "mistake by the lake", I would love to get involved. Dave
Submitted by emmettoconnell on Thu, 05/08/2008 - 9:01am.
From Janine Gates via email:
|
OlyBlog.net OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you. If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here. Latest Classified Ads Upcoming events
|