Top

news

Stories

 

Another Step for Gentrification in Columbia City?

Local shop owners are at odds over a proposed Business Improvement Association.

Columbia City is yuppie-friendly these days. Sure, there are still a few boarded-up storefronts and the occasional guttered beer bottle, but show up on a Saturday morning and you may as well be in Wallingford. Young, mostly white parents clog the sidewalks with their chocolate labs and their running strollers, spilling out of the local bakery, lattes in hand.

This formerly gritty south-end hood's been changing for some time now, and some property owners say it's time to take it to the next level. They want to form a Business Improvement Association—akin to a group effort to pretty the place up—something no neighborhood in Seattle has done in nearly a decade.

Others, however, say not only that it's not necessary, it's exactly the wrong time to be raising taxes just as the bleak economy is making it tough for folks to stay afloat. Plus, they fear it's just another harbinger of more gentrification.

Seattle has six BIAs. The first, Pioneer Square, was formed in 1983. Others include Broadway, Chinatown/International District, West Seattle, University District, and the downtown Metropolitan Improvement District— the most recent, formed in 1999.

The idea behind a BIA is to share the cost of making a neighborhood cleaner and safer. The money comes from an assessment levied on commercial and multi-family property owners within the boundaries of the association. Once the boundaries are drawn, 60 percent of the property owners must approve the idea for it to move forward. The City Council has the final say on whether to create the association. It's expected to vote on the Columbia City proposal this month.

BIAs often spring up when neighborhoods reach an evolutionary tipping point when property owners are no longer content just to sweep in front of their own shops, says Karen Selander, senior community development specialist at the city's Office of Economic Development. "[BIAs] are effective because they address the entire area," she says. "You don't have two or three owners doing a good job maintaining their property, with others in between that are a mess. It helps avoid resentment."

The city encourages the creation of BIAs and even invests in them, spending an average of $20,000 per neighborhood on consultants' fees and in staff time to get them set up, Selander says. Although BIAs can be disbanded just like they are created, with a 60 percent vote of property owners, once they're put in place, they usually stick around.

Robert Mohn, one of the organizers of Columbia City's BIA, says that the business district there (located along Rainier Avenue South between South Alaska and South Dawson Streets) has reached a key point in its maturity. Columbia City has achieved two goals, he explains: to meet the immediate needs of the neighborhood—where one can shop, eat, buy groceries, see a movie, etc.—and to be a destination for others.

"The [BIA] is a part of Columbia City's efforts to improve itself and be a great place for people to come enjoy themselves," says Mohn, who a decade ago purchased the building now inhabited by the Columbia City Ale House and who also owns the historic Grayson and Brown building on Rainier Avenue South. "That's what we're trying to do. It's another step in that direction."

Not so fast, says James Buchanan, who with his 86-year-old mother owns a small apartment building on 38th Avenue South. Buchanan, whose family has owned property in the neighborhood for more than 30 years, argues that it's up to the individual to keep things up.

"It's part of the responsibility that comes with ownership. If anyone puts graffiti on the place, I buy a can of paint and clean it up. If someone breaks a bottle, I pick it up," Buchanan says. "The country's in trouble. I rent to low-income people. If I have to raise rents [because of the BIA], they might not be able to stay...If other people want to do this, fine. We can't afford it."

Buchanan's modest and decently maintained four-unit apartment building sits a block off Rainier behind a giant U.S. Postal Service complex. He's skeptical of what benefit the BIA would provide to him. "I don't even have sidewalks on my street," he says.

Mohn argues that all property owners will get their fair share of the pie. "Every ratepayer will get service," he insists, adding that the fees are modest— most property owners will pay less than $1,000 a year. He says three-quarters of the fee is based on property size and one-quarter on value, so the assessment will stay relatively steady. "We don't want this to keep increasing," Mohn says, adding that 70 percent of the owners within the proposed boundary have approved the idea. The BIA's total annual operating budget is proposed to be $50,000.

Ron Soreano, who with his family owns Soreano's Hatfield Plumbing and three other Columbia City parcels, says the price may be modest, but it's the principle that bothers him.

"This is about the Johnny-come-latelys. We've been through the rough times. Columbia City [today] is cake," Soreano says over a latte at the Columbia City Bakery (one of the favorite hangouts for the running-stroller types, ironically).

1 | 2 | Next Page >>
 
  • J Harris 10/18/2010 6:35:00 AM

    I hope is dissolves. It’s a joke Rob Mohn is all about himself and his properties as one of the organizers of this bright idea he should have known that the proposed budget is not close to enough. But that would have taken reseach. Its all public and anyone can see the budgets.The university district pays the cleaning company more than Columbia city entire budget. But until the drug dealers, Hookers and other thugs are gone it’s a waste of time and money. They have a $50,000 30k for clean up 15k for making district safer and 5k for management expenses. The question I would have is how have they spent this 15k to improve safety? What exactly have they done to achieve this? I can tell you NOTHING. At least you see the man cleaning up daily good or bad you see him. I think they pressure washed last year. This BIA is a waste of Property owners money. I do live in this district and feel like theres not enough bang for the buck. Walk up and down Rainer Ave you still smell piss and crap that has not changed. The graffiti is not being taken down some of it had been there for months. So where is all these property owners money going?

  • The quick brown fox 12/05/2008 8:27:00 AM

    Thank you, Stakeholder, for a concise and cogent explanation of both sides of the BIA issue in Columbia City, with background to boot. You've explained the issues better in two brief comments than the article's author did in 2 pages. And managed to do so without insults or straw men.

  • Stakeholder 12/05/2008 2:51:00 AM

    One more thing; I'm not in favor of the BIA in Columbia City for several reasons, but mostly because it's unnecessary. What troubles me most about this story is the double-standard implied by the title of the article. Why is the term "gentrification" only applied to southeast Seattle and only as a negative impact? Aren't lower income people being displaced all over the city? Why is gentrification only a problem in Columbia City? What about the gentrification that has been ongoing for decades on Capitol Hill? What about Fremont? Gentrification is happening everywhere not just Columbia City. Columbia City and the rest of southeast Seattle desperatley needs economic growth and new market-rate housing. Southeast Seattle has lagged behind the rest of the city for 50 years. Gentrification is GOOD for southeast Seattle. We can't always be the city's poor bastard stepchild. Stakeholder

  • Stakeholder 12/04/2008 11:17:00 PM

    Former Mayor Norm Rice declared that southeast Seattle was 'underserved' by city services. The city promised to change their ways but nothing much has changed since Rice's declaration. More and better delivery of city services would eliminate the need for a BIA. A BIA is unnecessary in Columbia City. There has been reasonably good enforcement of building code violations by the Department of Planning & Development and by the Landmark Board which oversees the historic district. Columbia City is about six blocks long by less than two blocks wide. A BIA would be ridiculous in this tiny footprint. Besides, property taxes already pay for city services to address street repairs, litter & graffiti removal, and maintenance issue. In addition, the Landmark status restricts improvements to buildings and infrastructure in a historic community. The BIA idea is DOA in Columbia City. Stakeholder

  • The quick brown fox 12/04/2008 9:24:00 PM

    "Young, mostly white parents clog the sidewalks with their chocolate labs and their running strollers, spilling out of the local bakery, lattes in hand" ... "one of the favorite hangouts for the running-stroller type." This is reporting? So, because they're white, they're clogging the sidewalks of their business district? They shouldn't go to their local bakery? Then who should? Should they stay at home indoors where you won't have to see them? This is idiotic writing. Columbia City has, with hard work, managed to avoid becoming the hellhole that other areas of the city have become, and you're bitching because you see white people there going to their local bakery? And since they're white, have children, and drink coffee, therefore must be yuppies? This is something Rush Limbaugh would say. If they were black or Asian, would that make it better for you? Nowhere do you indicate that your view is how other locals could perceive it, or give any other reason for stating your opinion. You simply write it as disparaging fact. People you think are less hip than you have a belittling label slapped on them to try to make your story have a point. Is there any significance to the factoid that no neighborhood has formed a BIA in nearly a decade? Does that mean there's something wrong with it? Or does it just sound alarming to write it without explaining if there's any point? Did you bother to include any improvement this proposed BIA might actually make, beside implying it theoretically could include cleaning the sidewalk? Why didn't you find out? As usual, the Weekly has nothing to say but says it anyway.

  • John Hoole 12/04/2008 6:13:00 PM

    !!Controversy Trolling Alert!! Seventy percent of businesses in the BIA area think this is a good enough idea to support it. You might have included a one or two of their perspectives. Your distinction between soulless "yuppies" or "stroller-running types" and the wise veterans of the good old days in Columbia City is a wishful conjuring of cliche. The connection between the BIA fees and the real-world, negative affects of gentrification is tenuous. Renters are going to be priced out of their apartments because their landlord will have to absorb an additional fee of $83/month? You're want to dig a little deeper. As for the idea that "it's up to the individual to keep things up" -- well, that didn't work out so well in the early Nineties when the Columbia City business district was boarded up and crime-ridden. It was cooperative efforts among neighbors and business owners that made Columbia City what it is today. Which brings me back to the cartoon "yuppies" you have running around Columbia City, bugging business owners like Mr. Soreano with... business. Look closer and you might find young people who have found in Columbia City one of the few places in-city where they can afford a first home. Or renters who dig the neighborhoodsy feel and diversity of the place. Gentrification is at work in South Seattle. Many businesses and residents old and new, rich and poor will benefit by it. Others surely are feeling its pinch. The proposed BIA is a modestly-priced trash clean-up initiative. If you want to tell a story about suffering and displacement, it's out there, but you'll need to work a lot harder than this.

  • jcdk 12/04/2008 4:17:00 PM

    If 70% of Columbia City businesses support the BIA, why does this article interview more dissenters than supporters?

  • noway 12/04/2008 5:08:00 AM

    This should not be mandatory at all. If you want to join fine. What is up with this socialism running rampant. If the individual land owner wants to take care of his own property, that should be his right. All these new comers think they can just move in and push the long term folks around? Very un-American. Run your own business they way you want, and let the others do the same.

 

Most Popular Stories


Now Click This

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy