Seattle- Washington and Seattle are No 1 State and City for Millennials (Starbuck: rental, violent crime)

[uniquetraveler]

Originally Posted by udidwht

Unsolvable homeless problem? In case you noticed many today want to be homeless...it's a modern day lifestyle. They have zero desire to work. Why would you want to work when you have free shi_? It's an issue that isn't solvable because the problem (homeless people) don't want to be productive citizens but rather freeload and use drugs all day long.

Seattle has wasted tens of millions of dollars and the issue has only gotten worse. LOL! But here's the stickler....Seattle has recently said they can solve the problem but they will need another 50+ million to do it.

Suckers!

And they just banned straws & plastic utensils. Oh brother can we not get anymore stupid.

I think you misread my post I said it's not an unsolvable problem. Also, at a macro level it doesn't have much to do with modern lifestyle, otherwise one would see the homelessness issue in relatively inexpensive cities such as Spokane as well, which is not the case. The issue is more prevalent in cities like SF and Seattle where housing has increased exponentially in the last decade.

The solution to this multi fold but for a starter Seattle city needs to be up zoned, with more highrise condos/apartments instead of single family homes in city border to bring the cost of housing in general.

[udidwht]

Originally Posted by uniquetraveler

I think you misread my post I said it's not an unsolvable problem. Also, at a macro level it doesn't have much to do with modern lifestyle, otherwise one would see the homelessness issue in relatively inexpensive cities such as Spokane as well, which is not the case. The issue is more prevalent in cities like SF and Seattle where housing has increased exponentially in the last decade.

The solution to this multi fold but for a starter Seattle city needs to be up zoned, with more highrise condos/apartments instead of single family homes in city border to bring the cost of housing in general.

They go where they get free stuff. Not much free stuff in Spokane (not as liberal). Seattle with single family homes? LOL!


Highrise condos are not family friendly and also equate to big money.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by uniquetraveler

I think you misread my post I said it's not an unsolvable problem. Also, at a macro level it doesn't have much to do with modern lifestyle, otherwise one would see the homelessness issue in relatively inexpensive cities such as Spokane as well, which is not the case. The issue is more prevalent in cities like SF and Seattle where housing has increased exponentially in the last decade.

The solution to this multi fold but for a starter Seattle city needs to be up zoned, with more highrise condos/apartments instead of single family homes in city border to bring the cost of housing in general.

The prescriptions of both the Far Right (No Housing/Shelter) and the Far Left (A "House" for Everyone) are idealogically jiggered, distorting the truth and ignoring wide swaths of reality. Yes, there is a hard core of the homeless who are effectively "unhousable", due to refusing services/shelter and treatment/therapy, as well as criminals who hide among the homeless, but there are also many individuals and families who have been priced out of housing, as wages fall further and further behind an escalating cost of living. Losing housing can lead to job-loss, just as job-loss can lead to losing housing. Credit problems and minor infractions can be further barriers to housing, even if employed.

While we've been adding lots of "luxury" apartments for professionals/elites and subsidized apartments for the poor, the supply of affordable "workforce" housing continues to shrink. We need to use up-zoning as an incentive for developers to 1) develop affordable "workforce" housing and 2) replace affordable housing that is cannibalized by their developments.

[CrazyDonkey]

One of the attractions of Seattle to Millennials is that living without a car is very possible within many parts of the city. Dumping the car can easily save $500-750/month that would otherwise go towards paying for loan payments, insurance, maintenance, repairs, fuel, parking, tolls, etc. Save another $100 on the cost of a monthly transit pass, if you can live within walking or bicycling distance from work. Dump cable TV and easily save another $100. Shop at thrift and consignment stores and save another $100.

That's upwards of $1,000/month in savings that can instead be spent on higher rent, cafes, bars, live music, uber, Car2Go, cell phone, unlimited data plan, Netflix/Hulu, Amazon Prime, dating app, etc.

[thatguy950]

^good point, it used to be living without a car in Seattle was a no-go, these days however that’s changing and with more light rail and stuff I expect that trend to continue, we’ve got a ways to go but it’s a step in the right direction.

Also as a millennial myself, a lot of the high tech companies in Seattle also allow a lot of virtual work, which is definitely an attractive thing

[udidwht]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

One of the attractions of Seattle to Millennials is that living without a car is very possible within many parts of the city. Dumping the car can easily save $500-750/month that would otherwise go towards paying for loan payments, insurance, maintenance, repairs, fuel, parking, tolls, etc. Save another $100 on the cost of a monthly transit pass, if you can live within walking or bicycling distance from work. Dump cable TV and easily save another $100. Shop at thrift and consignment stores and save another $100.

That's upwards of $1,000/month in savings that can instead be spent on higher rent, cafes, bars, live music, uber, Car2Go, cell phone, unlimited data plan, Netflix/Hulu, Amazon Prime, dating app, etc.

In a city with hills everywhere. LOL! The city has tried already on more than 1 occasion to spread bike usage and it's failed miserably. Fact is cars are here to stay.

[leastprime]

Homelessness is even prevalent in Salem, OR (150,000). Fortunately or unfortunately we have social services both public and private that help perpetuate the problem. We also have a greenway along the Willamette River which is actually a campground for the pseudo-homeless.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by udidwht

In a city with hills everywhere. LOL! The city has tried already on more than 1 occasion to spread bike usage and it's failed miserably. Fact is cars are here to stay.

Lots of people live on Capitol Hill, First Hill, or in Lower Queen Anne/Belltown and walk to work in Downtown Seattle or SLU. Check out all the people trudging up Pike-Pine after 5pm. I've seen a good number of people bicycling to and from work along the BAT lanes in the 15th/Elliott corridor. Walking/bicycling can save the cost of a fitness center membership ($20-50)

I'm just pointing out that moving within walking/bicycling distance of work can save the cost of a monthly transit pass (~$100/mo). Dumping the car, however, represents by far the biggest savings. If you feel owning a car is essential for you, fine. You are free to choose to live where you want to live, if you can afford it.

Capitol Hill was developed in the streetcar era - many apartment buildings up there don't have off-street parking. Residents on the Hill with cars often have to park four or five blocks from where they live. Owning a car there, certainly in the Pike-Pine and Broadway corridors, can be a major pain in the behind.

[udidwht]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

Lots of people live on Capitol Hill, First Hill, or in Lower Queen Anne/Belltown and walk to work in Downtown Seattle or SLU. Check out all the people trudging up Pike-Pine after 5pm. I've seen a good number of people bicycling to and from work along the BAT lanes in the 15th/Elliott corridor. Walking/bicycling can save the cost of a fitness center membership ($20-50)

I'm just pointing out that moving within walking/bicycling distance of work can save the cost of a monthly transit pass (~$100/mo). Dumping the car, however, represents by far the biggest savings. If you feel owning a car is essential for you, fine. You are free to choose to live where you want to live, if you can afford it.

Capitol Hill was developed in the streetcar era - many apartment buildings up there don't have off-street parking. Residents on the Hill with cars often have to park four or five blocks from where they live. Owning a car there, certainly in the Pike-Pine and Broadway corridors, can be a major pain in the behind.

Yes, but I also routinely see them throwing their bikes on the front end rack of a bus saying...."To hell with this". LOL! If one is hoping to encourage rampant bike use Seattle is not the city of encouragement. LA perhaps but Seattle no.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by udidwht

Yes, but I also routinely see them throwing their bikes on the front end rack of a bus saying...."To hell with this". LOL! If one is hoping to encourage rampant bike use Seattle is not the city of encouragement. LA perhaps but Seattle no.

I think you are mistaking my comment as some kind of pro-bicycle/anti-car diatribe. I'm merely pointing out that moving within walking or bicycling distance is one, but far from the most significant, way that Millennials can cut costs to afford to live in a dense high-COL urban environment.

I'm neither encouraging nor discouraging bicycle use, rampant or otherwise. I am in favor of having choices, however - where safe and convenient bicycle routes are available, bicyclists will use them (see the Burke-Gilman Trail). When a bicyclist chooses to use a bus bike-rack, I'm just seeing them combining two modes of transportation, rather than opting to use a car - if the bus is an electric trolleybus, neither mode is adding carbon emissions to the atmosphere.