Tag: Greater Seattle

Business, Transportation, Urbanism

Greater Seattle: Bike and Scooter Share Could Soon Lap 2025’s Record-Setting Numbers

by Josh Feit

10.5 million by October > 10.5 million by December

Seattle scooter- and bike-share is about to break last year’s record of 10.5 million total rides—maybe as soon as this week, nearly three months before the year is over. The program hit 10 million rides as of late September, and with usage trending up—it increased 68 percent between 2024 and 2025, for example—we’re on pace to hit 13 million by the end of this year.

It costs $1 to access a bike or scooter and 47 cents a minute after that, or about $8 for a 15-minute ride. It gets much cheaper if you get a monthly membership for $5.99 to lock in lower fixed rates: $1.50 for five minutes, $2.85 for 20 minutes. SDOT also requires the main contractor Lime to have a low-cost program for low-income riders.

The scooters are more popular than the bikes, by the way—and there are far more of them in circulation too (more than 10,000 versus 3,500) when you combine the standing and seated models.

There are plenty of reasonable guesses to explain why rented bikes and scooters are growing in popularity. A seemingly obvious answer, the spike in ridership during FIFA, doesn’t seem to account for most of this year’s boon, though. Ridership during June and July, while the World Cup was in play, was higher than the comparable months for last year, but overall ridership was consistently higher in every other month this year as well, highlighting a trend that’s larger than FIFA tourism.

So what’s going on, besides $5.67 per gallon gas prices? One possibility: Four new protected bike lanes came online this year, including a few that go to popular tourist spots, including to the downtown waterfront and one along the waterfront itself, which connects to the existing Elliott Bay Trail.

You can also make the case that the program has been around for nearly nine years now and more people are simply familiar and comfortable with tapping on and bombing down Yesler or climbing up Denny, particularly for that first-mile-last-mile trip to get to or from the bus; the average trip in 2026 is 1.3 miles. And the average ride clocks in at 11.3 minutes.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

Normalizing bike and scooter trips points to my favorite possible explanation, or at least my favorite micromobility trend. Even though, as I reported in an earlier Greater Seattle, non-rush hour bike and scooter share is growing at a faster clip than traditional peak commute time use, more employers may be taking advantage of Lime’s business program that allows companies to offer a commute benefit for short-term bike and scooter rentals.

Those two facts aren’t contradictory. In fact, they’re likely complementary. As bike and scooter rides become more popular, companies are realizing they need to accommodate their employees. Institutionalizing alternatives to cars is the best way to wage the war, and I’m all for it, especially when it signals that companies realize it’s in their best interest to do so.

21% > 38%

The Downtown Seattle Association released some new data last week showing that downtown foot traffic (as measured by workers who work downtown, but don’t live there) has remained stuck since stabilizing in 2024 at around 60 percent of pre-pandemic levels. “Incoming Commuter Foot Traffic” was about 62 million annually in 2019, while it’s around 38 million today, a 38 percent drop.

This puts us on par with other cities such as Denver and Portland, but it’s triggering for the DSA. Bellevue’s recovery is about 17 percentage points better than downtown Seattle’s; their commuter foot traffic is just 21 percent lower than their pre-pandemic levels.

Back Alleys = Main Streets

Speaking of foot traffic and (speaking earlier) of the World Cup, the state temporarily eased some booze regulations in advance of FIFA to help businesses capitalize on the soccer crowds. House Bill 1515, “Modernizing the regulation of alcohol service in public spaces,” allowed restaurants and bars to expand the boundaries of outdoor-table liquor service, including into public space. It also allowed neighboring businesses to combine those spaces.

And while the World Cup has been over for months, the legislation will remain in effect until the end of 2027 as a pilot project so the bill’s sponsors, including prime sponsor Seattle Rep. Julia Reed (D-36, Seattle), can get feedback from the more than 70 licensed liquor businesses who got the temp permits to expand their alcohol service. Of course, it also means we’ll hear from neighbors and others about how the pilot is going.

That extra input could help. “World Cup and Pioneer Square Art Walk are great examples of how vibrant public spaces can be,” says Henry Watson, Director of Development with Urban Villages and the RailSpur project, a Pioneer Square art space that’s been working with SDOT and the state to increase alley activation. “The question I keep getting asked is how we can make that level of activation a regular thing,” he says. “SDOT and the state have a great vision of how to do that with HB 1515.”

“Activate the Alleys” is a longstanding urbanist agenda item; it’s been bandied about Seattle for decades. Here’s hoping the World Cup gave us the kick we needed to actually make it happen.

Josh@PubliCola.com

Business, Development, Economy, housing, Mayor Wilson

Greater Seattle: Inclusionary Zoning, Part 2; Amazon as a Percentage of the Budget; Permitted, but Struggling

By Josh Feit

Last week, I featured Seattle City Councilmember Dionne Foster in an item headlined “Inclusionary Zoning > No Inclusionary Zoning” to reflect her progressive affordable housing stance. However, according to a comprehensive new academic study, she has it backward.

No Inclusionary Zoning > Inclusionary Zoning

So says the study released this summer by an economist at UC Irvine about inclusionary zoning (IZ), a policy that requires builders to couple any market-rate housing they build with affordable housing. Seattle’s version of this—as in Foster’s resolution calling for inclusionary zoning requirements in residential areas where the policy doesn’t currently apply—uses a “fee in lieu” model where developers can pay into an affordable housing fund instead of including the affordable housing in their own projects.

Unlike other (inconclusive) research on IZ, the UC Irvine study had a clean before-and-after look at the policy, thanks to California’s unique history of going through a period when inclusionary zoning (including the fee-in-lieu model) was legal, illegal, and then legal again.

The study indicates inclusionary zoning does the opposite of what it’s intended to do, finding that IZ makes it more expensive to rent. California renters paid approximately $6.97 billion in additional rent in areas with IZ mandates. So, even as IZ funds some affordable units, it comes at a steep cost to renters, including low-income renters, who aren’t “lucky enough to get an IZ unit,” according to the study.

But the real zinger: The study then compared that rent increase to the number of affordable units created and found that it wasn’t worth the tradeoff. As the author bluntly states in the opening summary: “I estimate the cost of generating an affordable unit with inclusionary zoning to be approximately $800,000 [per the 8,990 units created] in ‘excess rents’ paid by market rate renters as a result of the policy’s constraint on supply. This exceeds the cost of directly incentivizing the creation of low-income housing [~$441,00 per unit] in California through existing programs.”

Seattle’s Budget = Amazon’s Stock Price

Speaking of being blunt, Erica didn’t hold back in her report on Mayor Wilson’s $2.5 billion budget proposal last week. And I quote: “JumpStart is Basically Just a Slush Fund Now.”

JumpStart, of course, is the 2020 tax on high-end salaries proposed and passed by former lefty city councilmember Teresa Mosqueda to pay for affordable housing and other progressive priorities. Now, according to a recent economic study commissioned by Seattle’s own Office of Economic Development, it increasingly covers the city’s regular budget shortfalls. Since 2024, when a newly elected city council majority changed the law to eliminate the original JumpStart spending plan, more than half of JumpStart revenues are used to cover the gap between city budget expenditures and general fund revenue.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

I’m not here to cry about that. True believers like me have lost that fight. But here’s a problem with  budgeting-by- JumpStart that everyone should note: The report found that “Seventy-five percent of JumpStart revenue comes from just 10 companies.”

This is emblematic of Seattle’s worrisome status as a one-crop town (big tech). “In summary,” the report states, “the city’s fiscal health now depends on the marginal location and compensation decisions of a handful of employers. It also depends, indirectly, on the stock prices of those employers.”

Zeroing in on the city’s largest company, the report continues: “When Amazon’s stock rises, Seattle’s tax base rises with it; when it falls, the base contracts. (Amazon’s stock price alone has ranged from roughly $85 to $245 over the past three years.) But it means that a fiscal base already concentrated in a few firms is further exposed to the single most volatile attribute of these firms—one the city has no ability to forecast or influence.”

Existing Third Places > New Startups

Wilson explicitly acknowledges the challenge by incorporating her recent “Resilient Economy” executive order  into her budget proposal. Seattle has “become increasingly concentrated on the tech sector,” the EO states. It commits the city to convene a task force “to develop and implement strategies for diversifying and growing Seattle’s economy.”

And while the specifics of the order focus on making it easier to permit and establish startups in tech-adjacent fields, that strikes me as being more top-down than middle-out. As I noted a few weeks ago, the thing that makes Seattle attractive to the talent needed for new startups are third spaces—i.e., existing businesses.

I wish Wilson’s proposal did more for the bars and restaurants and coffeeshops that are already permitted, but increasingly struggling: 67 percent of brick-and-mortar, small, independent businesses told OED they are under more financial stress than during the pandemic. “[Seventy-one] percent reported lower foot traffic than a year earlier, and only 12 percent said customer demand was sufficient to cover their cost structure.”

Josh@Publicola.com

City Council, Development, housing, Mayor Wilson, Transportation

Greater Seattle: Councilmember Foster Breaks the MHA Logjam
Construction workers packed city council chambers last Friday, September 18, to support city councilmember Dionne Foster’s tax holiday on  housing development.

By Josh Feit

Councilmember Dionne Foster > Mayor Katie Wilson

You couldn’t have a clearer juxtaposition. Mayor Wilson tried to cut a deal between housing developers and the affordable-housing left to accelerate housing production. And Councilmember Dionne Foster tried to cut a deal between housing developers and the affordable-housing left to accelerate housing production. Wilson put it off.

Foster moved it forward.

The city currently has an affordable housing program known as Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) which makes developers either add affordable housing to their projects or pay into an affordable housing fund whenever they build new projects. Ironically, the MHA program seems to have slowed housing production. Since MHA kicked in back in 2019, housing applications are down 94 percent and permits issued are down 66 percent. This means less housing supply, which increases rents for everybody—while also bringing in less money for affordable housing. To get production going again, developers wanted to cut MHA fees by 80 percent for two years on projects that are already in the pipeline but have stalled due to the fees. Their argument: A smaller fee on some production will generate more money for affordable housing than a hefty fee on minimal production.

Wilson’s efforts ended with a plan to convene a task force (with a goal of cutting a deal on the fees in early 2027). Enter Foster. She brought the parties together and surfaced math that showed two things: MHA revenues had dwindled to a minuscule portion of the Office of Housing’s affordable housing budget (6 percent down from 39 percent a few years ago) and millions in revenue were being left the table from unrealized development. Developers estimate that lowering the MHA fee would trigger about $24 million in affordable housing funds by greenlighting projects they already have cued up, but can’t move forward thanks to the fee. This is millions more than the anemic $11.7 million MHA has brought in so far this year at the full fee, and down from $67 million in 2020, before developers started forgoing projects.

That would also bring in an estimated $225 million in new construction sales tax and create up to 6,700 new units. Oh, and it would create new construction jobs, which is why labor packed a meeting of Foster’s housing committee on Friday to support her legislation to lower the fee by 80 percent for two years.

Despite the obvious boon for affordable housing, you still can’t convince the left that developers should get tax breaks. And so Foster’s deal—which, of course, still has to pass—includes keeping the full MHA fee in place on any new projects in vulnerable neighborhoods such as Beacon Hill, the Central District, and the Chinatown-International District where development is often considered synonymous with displacement.

It’s worth noting, though, that almost all the projects developers are trying to get moving again under the 80 percent discount are on vacant lots or lots that aren’t currently residential.

Wilson applauded Foster on her proposal. From the sidelines.

Inclusionary Zoning > No Inclusionary Zoning

So says Foster herself, who has added a resolution to her MHA-holiday ordinance clarifying that despite the temporary reduction in the MHA rate, she believes developer fees need to be a “core part” of the affordable housing equation in the future. Using developer fees to fund affordable housing is known as “inclusionary zoning,” a policy that conditions issuing permits for market-rate projects on the production of affordable housing.

Foster’s resolution calls for adding inclusionary zoning requirements in neighborhood residential zones—formerly single-family zones—that are currently exempt from MHA fees. Her resolution directs staff to “develop legislation implementing an inclusionary requirement for new market rate residential development in Neighborhood Residential zones … [and] estimate how an inclusionary requirement for new market rate residential development could … contribute to meeting the need for housing affordable to lower income households.”

This startled some urbanists who cheered her MHA holiday ordinance, but then wondered why she’d do a 180 by adding the fees where they currently don’t exist. Given the slumping post-MHA housing production numbers, urbanists ask why Seattle would tax something its wants to encourage—housing.

Foster, who wants to be “transparent that [her] vision” supports inclusionary zoning, says she doesn’t believe MHA is solely responsible for the falloff in housing production; she cites Trump’s tariffs, for one. However, she also says she wants to make sure the fees don’t stall development and wants staff to “recalibrate” MHA fees “to find the right balance.” (As Erica reported last week, Foster differentiates her resolution from a council proposal last year that would have simply applied the MHA fee structure as is.)

“Right now we are doing a short-term fee reduction to help get development back on track in the midst of lots of negative macroeconomic factors we weren’t facing a decade ago,” Foster said when asked about the seeming contradiction in her approach. “And as we look towards the future, I believe inclusionary zoning should continue to be a part of how we build a city that works for everyone. We just have to get the dials right. The resolution focuses on determining the right path to include neighborhood residential in that recalibration.”

Business, Economy, Urbanism

Greater Seattle: Third Places

By Josh Feit

5,250 > 778

Here’s a rejoinder to those who complain that Seattle’s taxes on big business are going to send major companies fleeing to Bellevue: Seattle has nearly 40 percent more cafes, retail shops, bars, arts and cultural spaces, community centers and food spots per capita than Bellevue.

Known as “third places,” these kinds of public living rooms are considered essential for attracting uniquely mobile high-tech workers away from competing cities.

Last week, the Seattle Department of Economic Development published a new, comprehensive report  about the need for Seattle to foolproof its economy by fostering a more varied set of businesses that participate on the national and international scale. The report, which was written by local economic consultants, cites Seattle’s impressive map of third places as a must-have. “Seattle offers a remarkably rich environment for these connections due to its high concentration of third places mixed into its built environment,” the report states as part of its thesis that third places are an asset for drawing the creative class that’s necessary to resuscitate our flagging startup culture.

The report’s comparison point for what we don’t want to be? Bellevue.

“The difference between Seattle and a less third place-rich region like Bellevue is stark. Seattle has substantially more third places than Bellevue (5,250 vs. 778). Part of this, of course, is a matter of population. But Seattle also has more third places per square mile (63 vs. 23) and per capita than Bellevue (71 vs. 52 per 10,000 residents).”

“Stark” is not hyperbole. When you look at the specifics of Seattle’s 40 percent per-capita advantage over our neighbor across Lake Washington, you can see why young workers would be miserable in Bellevue. While Seattle has more third spaces overall—libraries, community centers, cafes, and gyms, for example—the advantage is stunning when you look at spots that you traditionally associate with “going out.” More than three times as many bars. One-hundred sixty percent more cultural arts venues. Sixty-five percent more shops. Forty-nine percent more dining options.

And, upending stereotypes, Seattle also has more places of worship—by a reverent 42 percent.

Bellevue does beat Seattle in an important category, though. And it’d be good for policy makers at city hall to take note of this. When it comes to parks, Bellevue beats Seattle by 14 percent—7.1 to 6.1 per every 10,000 people.

10 pm > 6 pm

The report doesn’t say how late Seattle’s third spaces stay open on average. That’s important. While people want to move to a city where there’s places to hang out, they likely don’t want to move to a city where there’s a stopwatch ticking on how long they can.  And anecdotally, I can tell you: Shops close too early. This is true in Bellevue as well, but Seattle’s lackluster evening economy is a noteworthy problem in its own right.

From coffee shops to corner stores, from retail to social services, Seattle needs a more energetic nighttime ecosystem. I wrote about this problem decades ago, and I wrote about it again a few years ago, because it’s a defining and persistent shortcoming here. Seattle is too soporific. Newsflash to the rest of country: Seattle is not woke!

A sleepy city undermines equity. The nighttime isn’t just about socializing. If it was easier to take care of business after 5 pm by having greater access to the practical stuff that’s traditionally closed or diminished at night—government services, retail, drug stores, administrative offices, buses, rental visits—people, particularly working-class people, would face fewer barriers to the economic opportunities here.

38 percent > 30 percent

Another thing missing from the report: The evidence to support the consultant’s contention that the creative class workers we need actually gravitate toward third places. I’m not saying I disagree with the report’s thesis. I want it to be true. And it’s certainly logical to assume that creative, young techies like to be out and about.

But is it?

According to a dispiriting essay titled “America is Becoming a Nation of Homebodies,” which urbanist Diana Lind wrote last year, “Americans now spend an average of 99 more minutes at home each day than they did in 2003, while this generation of 15- to 24-year-olds spends 124 more minutes at home than their counterparts two decades ago. Meanwhile, just 30 percent of Americans spent time socializing and communicating in person on an average day, down from 38 percent in 2014, according to [an] American Time Use Survey.”  And another recent report found that Americans are also speaking less—and that the issue is especially pronounced among people younger than 25.

Numbers detailing Seattle’s penchant for being out and about—and how those numbers are trending—would be helpful to have if urbanists want to backup the OED consultant’s third-place advocacy for “face-to-face communication” and “connections.”

The World Cup social scene may have been an aberration. But compared to the crowds I’m seeing at art walks, game days, Saturday night on Capitol Hill, lines at popups, music and cultural events, and crowded coffee shops these days, it wasn’t a huge aberration. Seattle seems like it’s hopping. It’d be nice to know if that’s true.

Josh@PubliCola.com

Density, Mayor Wilson, Transit

Greater Seattle: Late Press Conferences, On-Time Buses, Selfish Housing

By Josh Feit

Five and a half hours > A half hour

As they spin headlines to make Mayor Katie Wilson look bad, local TV news’ populist schtick fails news reporting basics. Taking the word of an unnamed source from SPD who says the press conference after July’s Seattle-Center shooting was delayed because Wilson was waiting on “dignitaries” (the governor and the Seattle congresswoman) is a delusional account if you actually read the email and text message threads from that night.

What the behind-the-scenes conversations between the mayor’s office and SPD show is that as soon as 6:30, immediately after the shooting, Wilson was looking to her staff and to SPD to assess the possibility of going to Seattle Center to make a statement. SPD, however, told her to hold off as they secured the scene. They then withheld critical information—namely, that the shooting wasn’t terrorism or a mass shooting, but a personal fracas, keeping the public largely in the dark for five and a half hours, between 7:30 and 1am when they put out a blog post about the incident. The police were also in delay mode because they were waiting for (now former) chief Shon Barnes to get a briefing and hold a Teams call with elected officials..

This chaos stalled Wilson’s trip to Seattle Center. But when she finally got there shortly after 10 pm, and a presser was ready to go, (with the SPD still reticent on the details) there was a wait of less than half an hour for Governor Ferguson and Congresswoman Jayapal to arrive—far less than the length of time SPD kept critical information from the public.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

The 8 > The L8

My favorite way of judging the mayor—and one that is actually populist (despite the convoluted right-wing notion that riding the bus is somehow elitist)—is by keeping my eye on the infamous (L)8 bus.

Wilson, the founder and former co-director of the Transit Riders Union, has thrown money, fresh paint, and SDOT planners at the historically sluggish, major east-west route. The first part of her plan—an eastbound bus-only lane on Denny—went into effect on August 24. And as part of Wilson’s plan, Metro added more buses the same week.

And, well, well, well. It’s still early (and there are more fixes to come), but dramatic signs of improvement are already clear. On-time performance  jumped to from 68.6 percent percent to 77.8 percent between this August and August 2025, an increase that only includes one week of improved service on the 8. So far in September, on-time performance has continued to climb, to 78.5 percent.

The 7,203 average daily riders (July’s numbers) who rely on the 8 likely appreciate Mayor Wilson’s focus on the basics; as a regular rider, I know I do.

Living Alone ≠ The Housing Crisis

The Seattle Times’ FYI Guy claims the sharp increase in people living solo is “eating up” units, saying we could address most of the housing crisis without building new housing if those selfish singles would just “double up.”

First of all, my own FYI: People who “live alone” don’t live alone. We’re living in multifamily buildings with plenty of other people. This type of dense housing is better for the environment and brings down rents.

The Seattle Times column goes onto to pooh-pooh the idea that rigid zoning is the culprit, even though Seattle’s suburban character notoriously limits mutlifamily housing in the city.

So, I guess, for my contribution, I should ask someone to move in with me in my 350-square-foot apartment to lower regional housing costs while those who eat up 5,000-square-foot lots should continue to manspread.

Josh@PubliCola.com

City Council, housing, Mayor Wilson

Greater Seattle: Katie Wilson is to Jimmy Carter as Zohran Mamdani is to Barack Obama

By Josh Feit

First of all, a quick followup to an item from a couple of weeks ago, when I wrote: “Trump’s Case Against US Olympian David Hearn for Vandalizing the Reflecting Pool (since abandoned by Trump’s own DOJ) > North Seattle Couple’s Case for Recalling Katie Wilson.”

Yup. Last week, King County Superior Court Judge Patrick Oishi dismissed the request for a recall. At a confusing hearing last Thursday, August 27, Oishi told the petitioners their case was “befuddling.” For starters, they missed a filing deadline and then withdrew their request. Seems like the Trump analogy was spot on. And in what seemed even more similar to Trump’s endless mishegas, the couple then claimed they had more info. Oh brother.

Barack Obama > Jimmy Carter

Speaking of Wilson and analogies to presidents, let me alert you to this one: With her econo-travel  aesthetic, earnest policy brain, lefty-populist comfort zone, socially-awkward-bookworm personality, and (from what we hear about her behind-the-scenes leadership style) prickly isolation on the 7th floor—Wilson is Seattle’s own Jimmy Carter. If this analogy isn’t tracking for Gen Zers and Millennials, ask the internet about solar panels, sweaters, and thermostats. Carter, an outsider who was a elected during America’s post-Watergate call for goodie-goodie governance, eventually started to tank in the polls during his presidency. I initially thought Wilson’s high-wattage smile and unbridled joy in civics would confound the naysayers, critics, and bitter media. But—recall effort or not—recent polling indicates this mayor is in trouble.

Thanks to Wilson’s socialist label and sudden, surprise rise, the analogy that used to come to mind was more encouraging: Wilson was Seattle’s own Zohran Mamdani. But Mamdani veers toward a presidential analogy of his own. And it’s the opposite of a one-termer like Carter who got mired in “malaise.” Mamdani’s soaring popularity, confident charm, and big-ideas agenda make him like Barack Obama, an incorrigibly popular two-term president.

As Mamdani continues to wow the public and generate hope with his own gleeful project of sweeping governance (sweltering subway stations as pools of sustainable energy being the latest Mamdani lightning bolt) a pal in New York asked me why Wilson was having so much trouble in Seattle. I don’t think this fully explains it, but the fact that he’s a he and she’s a she has evidently allowed the media to normalize an unbridled condescension, giving their anti-Wilson bias free rein.

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

 

50 > 0

Protesting density, liberal Boomers and Xers often quote Joni Mitchell’s famous line, “They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.” Unwittingly, their knee-jerk “Development=Bad” mantra prioritizes car-dependent lifestyles. By stalling new housing development, they are locking pervasive car culture in place, thwarting the density needed to create walkable neighborhoods and expanded transit service. I derisively call it Joni Mitchell Politics.

So, as summer comes to a close, let’s applaud the Seattle Office of Housing and City Councilmember Dionne Foster’s pro-housing politics. Thanks to legislation they passed earlier this summer, OH used $6 million to acquire the site of a former gas station, mini-mart, and parking lot on East Montlake Place E. in the upscale Montlake neighborhood to build 50 below-market-rate condos. There’s currently zero affordable housing in the pricey area.

Under Seattle’s Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda, adopted in 2015, high-income communities like Montlake that lack affordable housing are known as “high opportunity” neighborhoods.

In her summer wrap-up newsletter, Foster noted the housing win: “Through acquiring property in a high opportunity neighborhood in Montlake we are locking in a future for affordable homeownership in a neighborhood that currently does not have affordable homeownership.”

Josh@publicola.com