Seattle area future (Everett, Rainier, Roosevelt: real estate market, 2013, condos)

[Seattle4321]

How do y'all see the future off seattle and the surrounding areas in terms of transportation, addisions to the skyline, tourism, major projects in seattle and the sourounding areas and where will the major growth areas be etc. thanks

[sean98125]

Transportation planning will focus on bikes and buses and trains over privately owned vehicles.

There will be more towers built through out the city as density continues to be the buzzword of the day.

South Lake Union will continue to grow, and the next big areas to be developed will be the University District, Roosevelt, and Northgate as light rail opens there. There is also likely to be more development in Rainier Valley. Gentrification will continue to push poorer citizens outside of the city and into the suburbs.

[GatsbyGatz]

Originally Posted by sean98125

Transportation planning will focus on bikes and buses and trains over privately owned vehicles.

There will be more towers built through out the city as density continues to be the buzzword of the day.

South Lake Union will continue to grow, and the next big areas to be developed will be the University District, Roosevelt, and Northgate as light rail opens there. There is also likely to be more development in Rainier Valley. Gentrification will continue to push poorer citizens outside of the city and into the suburbs.

Everything said here.

Downtown and South Lake Union will fill in all available space with high rise office, hotel, and residential units. 400' foot towers seems to be the standard height going up right now.

Capitol Hill, First Hill, Lower Queen Anne, and Yesler Terrace will continue to build high-density housing, with Capitol Hill in particular growing very dense after the opening of the underground Link Station. Capitol Hill's residential housing neighborhoods could see potential upzoning, especially nearest the Underground Link Station. Yesler Terrace is getting redeveloped for high rise, mixed-income living (planned to make the area more desirable to live in by diluting the amount of affordable housing with market-rate housing).

Ballard will continue to be one of Seattle's fastest-growing neighborhoods, likely rivaling Capitol Hill in terms of higher-density living. A future underground Link Station is inevitable given the rapidly growing population. This light rail line will likely have an underground Link Station in Fremont as well, further encouraging high density growth for Fremont. This line will travel northwards, probably with Link Stations in North Seattle near Aurora Hwy, encouraging greater investment to this rather under-invested area.

Northgate and Roosevelt will see massive growth after the completion of the Link Stations.

West Seattle and urban nodes in South Seattle will continue to see investments as gentrification raises the value of all locations in close proximity to Downtown.

Wish list:

I really, really hope to see Seattle eventually cap the I-5 between Downtown and First/Capitol Hill. The freeway is a huge trench that completely divides Seattle's center in half. Seattle would GREATLY benefit from covering the freeway, essentially adding a ton of space for building more office/residential and park space.

[KaliaCK]

I think eventually Seattle would like to be completely connected by light rail. However that will easily take the next 20 years to accomplish. I know ideally they want to get as far out as Everett. Metro bus lines here are actually reducing in service come fall due to lack of funding, which is crazy considering a good majority of people ride the bus to work and it can be already crammed pack during peak hours. Growth transportation wise is only looking up but in the meantime getting there expect major growing pains.

Tourism I don't see increasing overall very much. Seattle is attractive place employment wise and raising a family but nothing spectacular really attracting people to the city besides that. It's really a poorman's San Francisco in terms of touristy things to do and weather (although its been getting a lot nicer a lot earlier in the past few years). However we do get a fair amount of Asian tourists due to Mariners, and sister cities in Asia.

[BATCAT]

Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz

I really, really hope to see Seattle eventually cap the I-5 between Downtown and First/Capitol Hill. The freeway is a huge trench that completely divides Seattle's center in half. Seattle would GREATLY benefit from covering the freeway, essentially adding a ton of space for building more office/residential and park space.

This caught my attention, because I walk across (via overpass) or alongside (Eastlake or Melrose) I5 very often, and I've daydreamed many times about what it would be like if we could cover that stretch of I5 and reclaim that land.

I'm sure building that portion of the freeway seemed like a great idea at the time, and in fact maybe there's just no real alternative to how Seattle could have developed, but it is a real shame that it has to be there. It separates Capitol Hill from Eastlake, South Lake Union, and downtown in such a harsh way. It's a big, noisy, ugly obstacle to local traffic, pedestrians, and bikes.

I'm no engineer, though... If we covered it, could you actually put any kind of "real" buildings on the land? Even if the answer is "no", it would make a heck of a park!

[GatsbyGatz]

Originally Posted by BATCAT

This caught my attention, because I walk across (via overpass) or alongside (Eastlake or Melrose) I5 very often, and I've daydreamed many times about what it would be like if we could cover that stretch of I5 and reclaim that land.

I'm sure building that portion of the freeway seemed like a great idea at the time, and in fact maybe there's just no real alternative to how Seattle could have developed, but it is a real shame that it has to be there. It separates Capitol Hill from Eastlake, South Lake Union, and downtown in such a harsh way. It's a big, noisy, ugly obstacle to local traffic, pedestrians, and bikes.

I'm no engineer, though... If we covered it, could you actually put any kind of "real" buildings on the land? Even if the answer is "no", it would make a heck of a park!

I live on the west side of Capitol Hill. From atop the hill above the freeway, it is very easy to see how an elevated park could be built over the I-5. This would create a park with one of the best views in the city. I only wish the builders of the I-5 had dug a deeper trench so as to make it easier to cap it, but as it is now it is very possible to simply put a roof over it and place a park.

And yes, it is possible to build structures over it. The Washington State Convention Center is built over a covered portion of the I-5.

There are just so many benefits to capping the I-5 that I'm surprised the city hasn't issued a study plan yet. I honestly think it deserves greater priority than the boondoggle that is the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement tunnel project. It's sad to think that the money taxpayers may potentially be spending on the mechanic delays could pay for the freeway cap...

[Blondebaerde]

Read an article today that there are about 50,000 software people employed in the Seattle metro area(1). That's a bright spot, and growing fast. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, LinkedIn, Expedia, Avanade, Facebook, and others are hiring. I know of few majors that are scaling back; just the opposite.

Trickle-down economics of this trend are a big part of questions asked in this forum. Another person on-thread who mentioned "priced out" of real estate, from Seattle core to elsewhere: the tech boom is part of the root cause. A contributing factor, though not the only one of course.

Hard to say what will happen to SLU and Eastside real estate markets, given the variables, but I would "assume" the market will become more expensive before it becomes less, assuming demand from new software people keeps increasing. Barring a macroeconomic shock of some kind. Frankly, when enough people making six figures simply "can't" find housing within a reasonable distance of (SLU, Eastside) demand to build more will perhaps overcome resistance. Condos, townhomes, Belleuve and Seattle: the direction "up" (vs. out) might come into play.

If I worked in SLU, commuting from Eastside, I'd do everything in my power NOT to SOV since it can be unbearable. I'd go to alternatives: mass transit, my motorcycle, car and van pools. I think that's what planners want us to do anyway. Look for more people to come to the same conclusion, as growth continues.

(1) KUOW online: "competition for tech talent heats up in Seattle area", September 2013

[Garfunkle524]

Seattle just passed the $15/hr minimum wage, so when that takes effect it could do a whole lot of crazy things to the local economy in the future.

[jm31828]

Originally Posted by KaliaCK

I think eventually Seattle would like to be completely connected by light rail. However that will easily take the next 20 years to accomplish. I know ideally they want to get as far out as Everett. Metro bus lines here are actually reducing in service come fall due to lack of funding, which is crazy considering a good majority of people ride the bus to work and it can be already crammed pack during peak hours. Growth transportation wise is only looking up but in the meantime getting there expect major growing pains.

Tourism I don't see increasing overall very much. Seattle is attractive place employment wise and raising a family but nothing spectacular really attracting people to the city besides that. It's really a poorman's San Francisco in terms of touristy things to do and weather (although its been getting a lot nicer a lot earlier in the past few years). However we do get a fair amount of Asian tourists due to Mariners, and sister cities in Asia.

I'm not sure I agree about the tourism aspect. There is a LOT to off here to tourists- this is one of the most beautiful regions in the country (if not THE most beautiful to many people)- people come to Seattle for the sights to be had in the city, and as a jumping off point to stunningly gorgeous places of interest within relatively short driving distance, such as Mount Rainier, the North Cascades, the Olympics, etc. A lot of people in the rest of the country still don't even know what exists up here- and I could see that once our sights become more well known, more people would come to Seattle on vacation than we already get.

[kaday]

Originally Posted by jm31828

I'm not sure I agree about the tourism aspect. There is a LOT to off here to tourists- this is one of the most beautiful regions in the country (if not THE most beautiful to many people)- people come to Seattle for the sights to be had in the city, and as a jumping off point to stunningly gorgeous places of interest within relatively short driving distance, such as Mount Rainier, the North Cascades, the Olympics, etc. A lot of people in the rest of the country still don't even know what exists up here- and I could see that once our sights become more well known, more people would come to Seattle on vacation than we already get.

I agree as well. Also the cruise ships bring so much business into Seattle. I think that will continue to grow.