Marty Kaplan

Friends of Seattle's picture

Marty Kaplan is running for Seattle City Council Position 6.

Table of Contents

 

Analysis

Marty Kaplan, a member of the Seattle Planning Commission, has had a 30-year career as an architect and community leader. Seattle owes him a debt of gratitude for his work saving the Pike Place Market alongside Victor Steinbrueck in 1971, and he has done solid work on the Planning Commission and on other committees supporting polices to make Seattle affordable and livable. We were glad to see that Mr. Kaplan supports the green bag fee, investments in all modes of mass transit, the Bicycle Master Plan, the Pedestrian Master Plan, the backyard-cottages ordinance, transit-oriented development, and improvements to the design of townhomes.

But we part ways with Mr. Kaplan on a couple key issues, and we didn’t find enough in his candidacy to come back to him for an endorsement. In his interview, Mr. Kaplan explained to us that he opposes the commuter tax (“head tax”) because it is a disincentive to creating jobs, even though the tax is small ($25 per year per employee who drives to work in a single-occupancy car). Admittedly, we are endorsing Jessie Israel, and she shares Mr. Kaplan’s opposition to the commuter tax. But Mr. Kaplan had curious views on the economics of the tax. When we asked him what he would do to make up for the loss of $5 million in revenue for transportation funding, he said that the tax cut would result in enough economic growth to make up for the lost revenues. This analysis seemed like supply-side economics, and he offered no other ideas for how to replace the lost $5 million in funding for alternative transportation.

Mr. Kaplan’s view of the waterfront tunnel was the converse of his position on the commuter tax. In the case of the tunnel, he thought the taxes and government expenditures were a good thing and would grow the economy. He told us, “We don’t have a choice on the waterfront.” And Mr. Kaplan argued that the downtown economy would shrink without a tunnel. We don't share Mr. Kaplan's doomsday view, as the center city is thriving without a tunnel right now, and the I-5+surface+streets alternative would do well at opening up the waterfront and stimulating new growth downtown. The tunnel, in contrast, is a tax-and-spend approach and a misallocation of resources.

With regard to funding bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, Mr. Kaplan blundered (as have other candidates, such as Bobby Forch and David Miller in Position 8 and Dorsol Plants in Position 2) and said merely that such investments should come out of the transportation budget. They already do (see pages 379-490 of the city’s adopted 2009 budget in this PDF). The real problem is that not enough money is allocated to them.

We do not recommend voting for Mr. Kaplan. But we hope he continues to serve the city in a volunteer capacity, as he says he has many ideas for improving Seattle’s industrial-lands policies and incentive-zoning laws.

 

Interview

 

 

Questionnaire Responses

Table of Contents:

General Questions

 

Friends of Seattle's Mission

My values and priorities are yours. As a native Seattleite, honored architect and 30 year leader in my community, I have turned our common ideals into actions and community service by focusing my commitment on the quality, character and diversity of our neighborhoods. Leading in my communities on boards and commissions for decades, I have followed my deep passions for Seattle; preserving our history and environment.

A leader on the Market Historical Commission and serving the last 5 years on our Seattle Planning Commission, I have worked hard to advance policies that inspire livable, walkable, sustainable, affordable, and healthy communities.

Qualifications

  • Please describe any professional accomplishments that demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you are an incumbent) or would demonstrate your effectiveness as an elected official (if you have not yet held office).

In 1971 helping Victor Steinbrueck save the Pike Place Market, I have continued on being elected to multiple terms on the AIA Board, Intiman Theatre Board-10 years, Market Historical Commission-6 years-2 as Chair, and I'm currently a member of the Seattle Planning Commission-Co-Chair of our Land Use and Transportation Committee among others. I am also a leader on the Queen Anne Community Council.

I am intimately familiar with the issues facing our City and Council and possess the unique experience and ability to blend the needs of our environment, businesses, and neighborhoods, necessary to advance a comprehensive vision for Seattle's future.

Representing Seattle

Background: Seattle is the most populous city in Washington and is the state's economic engine. At the same time, Seattle cannot address many of its problems without working with King County, regional entities (Sound Transit and the PSRC), and the state government. Yet many observers believe that Seattle's interests are represented inadequately at those levels. For example, the Muni League has criticized the 40-20-40 rule for allocating new Metro transit funding. Further, transit advocates note that the state's current tax system disadvantages transit. And the Legislature refused to allocate federal stimulus dollars for road projects in Seattle.

  • As an elected official representing Seattle, how would you work with King County, regional governmental entities, the state legislature, and the governor to ensure their budgets and policies address Seattle's needs?

Some believe that the strain may be influenced by personalities and some believe that being the largest city in the state, Seattle is naturally prejudiced because we ask for and require an unbalanced attention. If elected, I would look forward to bringing my extensive and extraordinary leadership experience, along with my fresh voice to advance a thoughtful and respectful conversation with others.

I firmly believe that there is an undeniable interdependence upon the strength of Seattle's economy and that of our entire state. My skills as an architect and success as a collaborator and consensus builder are a prerequisite for leadership.

City Council Committees

  • If you are elected, which issues would you like included in your portfolio as a committee chair?

Because of my unique experience, I would be most qualified to immediately contribute as chair of PLUNC or Transportation. I have been working closely with Council and the mayor during the last 5 years on the Commission and would advance several policies for I have strongly advocated:

  • Revise the incentive zoning legislation from a one-size-fits-all policy with hardly one affordable unit produced to a real incentive taking into consideration location, market, construction costs and real production of affordable units;
  • Advance legislation focusing smart growth and density in our Urban Centers/Villages and transportation corridors adjacent to transit options, bike, and pedestrian opportunities.

 

Issues

 

Waste Reduction

Background: Rather than build an expensive new transfer in Georgetown to handle the growing volume of trash generated in Seattle, the City of Seattle adopted a "Zero Waste Strategy" centered on reducing waste. As part of that strategy, the City Council adopted a 20-cent "green fee" for disposable shopping bags.

  • Do you support the green fee? Why or why not?

Yes. I am a proponent of incentives and the use of incentives to change public behavior. In Ireland, for example, a similar bag tax had been implemented and retailers report little to no change in business. Plastics have proven to be a huge environmental issue and one for which we must find an immediate solution.

Alaskan Way Viaduct

Background: Governor Gregoire signed a legislative bill ordering the Washington State Department of Transportation to design a bored tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct. This bill contains language allocating cost overruns to Seattle citizens, although some question whether the language has legal significance. Notwithstanding that provision, the City of Seattle committed $930 million and the Port of Seattle $300 million to finance the tunnel. Although the exact tax consequences of these commitments are not totally clear, it is safe to assume that the Port's contribution would result in higher property taxes for Seattle property owners, and the City's pledge would be funded with increases in property taxes, City Light utility rates, and possibly other taxes and fees.

  • Do you support the plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a bored tunnel? Why or why not?

    • Yes, replacing the ALV with the deep bored tunnel is all about preserving, enhancing and building our economy, connecting our waterfront to our Center City and creating a 21st century boulevard and waterfront park. This infrastructure investment is a regional solution and critical to the efficient movement of goods and people thru our city.

    As a Planning Commissioner, I have had the opportunity to participate in dozens of briefings, meetings, ad-hoc committees, and the (AWV) Alaskan Way Viaduct Stakeholders Committee to learn, review, and comment upon the options for replacing the viaduct.

  • If you support the tunnel, what would you do to address the cost-overruns issue?

    • As an architect who has been responsible for budget and successful discharged my budget management duties for 37 years, I uniquely possess the experience to forward the Council's confident project management oversight. We must enter into contracts that protect our city and ensure that design and construction decisions represent the strongest commitments together with adequate contingency budgets.

  • If you oppose the tunnel, what would you do to prevent its implementation?

    • I do not oppose the tunnel-See above.

Transit

Background: The City of Seattle already contributes to local transit. The City put together the financing package to construct the South Lake Union streetcar line, and the City and King County Metro share the ongoing operating costs for that line. Further, the Bridging the Gap tax package finances some Metro bus service within Seattle, and Bridging the Gap also pays for street improvements designed to expedite bus travel.

  • If elected, how do you intend to improve the in-city transit system?

Our transit system is about connecting our neighborhoods and I believe that a healthy mix of transit opportunities act to ensure a forward commitment to efficiency and sustainability. First I will re-negotiate our 40-40-20 split from Metro founding our position on ridership numbers-we should base decisions on linking people to their jobs and homes and not on political decision making. Second, I will advance strategies to integrate our diverse transit systems to make coordination and efficiencies possible, and advocate for a more committed east-west network of connections. Third, I will advocate for finally improving our sidewalks and continue investments in cycling programs that link neighborhoods to transit facilities.

Bicycle Infrastructure

Background: The City of Seattle has adopted a Bicycle Master Plan, which provides a vision for improving bicycling facilities in Seattle.

  • Do you support the Bicycle Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • On the Planning Commission where we have been reviewing the Plan, I have advanced advice that addresses safety and access concerns. The system of sharrows has added greatly to the network of biking options, but we must do more and do better. Advocating for more bicycle commute trip and less VMT requires a committed investment in more bike lanes. I will advocate for redefining many of our R.O.W's from only auto-truck routes, to shared complete streets that take into consideration better facilitation of bike lanes and safe routes.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

I believe that the Bicycle Master Plan is a transportation project and should be funded as such. By redefining the funding mechanism for transportation project to include the Bicycle Master Plan objectives, we will begin to sustainably commit to using transportation funds to integrate our complete transportation network and in that way begin contributing to reducing VMT.

Pedestrian Infrastructure

The City Council is considering whether to adopt a draft Pedestrian Master Plan.

  • Do you support the Pedestrian Master Plan? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support it, do you have ideas for improving the plan?

    • On the Planning Commission where we have been reviewing the Plan, I have advanced advice that addresses safety concerns and the lack of a complete system of sidewalks and urban trails. In order to support transit-we must provide safe and accessible sidewalks. In order to support the Bike plans we need complete streets that respect bike/ped infrastructure investments.

  • If you support it, how do you suggest the City fund the plan?

As stated above, I believe that we should consider funding the Pedestrian Master Plan improvements thru the transportation budget since indeed they are linked and founded upon the same considerations of moving people and goods.

Land Use and Multifamily Housing

Background: According to U.S. Census data cited in the Seattle Comprehensive Plan, about half of Seattle's households live in multifamily housing. Further, according to the Plan, approximately 40% of Seattle's total land area is set aside for residential use-35% for single-family residences but only 5% for multifamily dwellings. That 5% dedicated to multifamily housing tends to be concentrated in "urban villages" or along arterial streets, which are noisy and dirty. However, "backyard cottages" (also known as "detached accessory dwelling units) are also allowed in singe-family zones in Southeast Seattle.

  • Would you support legislation to allow backyard cottages to be built in all single-family zones? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • Would you ever support a contract rezone or a broader rezone allowing for more housing to be built on a site? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the basic concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding on specific locations where more housing should be built?

    • As Co-Chair of the Seattle Planning Commissions Land Use and Transportation Committee, I have been directly working with advancing advice to the Mayor and City Council concerning locational criteria for increased densities. Areas, like Urban Centers and Villages that are currently served by infrastructure investments like transit should receive the first consideration. Then areas of our city like transit hubs and corridors, and related areas that could receive logical upgrades should be eligible for increased housing.

  • If you support the concept of rezoning, what criteria would you use in deciding where more housing should be built?

More housing should be built in neighborhoods that will accept it. We must consider that our neighborhoods are the heart and soul of our city and-we must consider the character, quality, and diverse character of each when advancing strategies for increased housing. Beyond the Urban Centers/Villages, we might review opportunities to increase housing densities at the edges where we have the collision of NC zones and SF zones. Now, these adjacencies are brutal and blunt, replete with commercial building backing up to single family yards. Additionally I help write our Commissions Cottage Housing and Backyard Cottage handbook that will inspire sustainable opportunities to increase the housing stock within single family neighborhoods.

Many newly built townhouses in Seattle are architectural atrocities, and site plans tend to be car-dominated. Most townhouse developments are exempt from the City of Seattle's Design Review Program. It is also difficult to find attractive new condos and apartment buildings. To address some of these problems, the City Council is considering a package of revisions to the zoning code.

  • Do you support the proposed revisions to the multifamily housing zoning code? [Yes/No only please]

    • Yes.

  • If you support the revisions, do you have ideas for improving the proposed revisions?

    • Yes. I helped lead the effort to bring townhome projects into the design review process during the last 4 years. As a Queen Anne Community Council leader, I saw firsthand the effects of these projects and the damage many were doing to their communities. I worked tirelessly with the Mayor and City Council to advance a new strategy for improving the zoning requirements and design review process. As many of these projects can be affordable and workforce housing choices, it was import to me to advance policy advice that would not add cost or time to the permitting review. Soon neighborhoods and you will be able to review these project before they are built.

City Governance

Yes.

Creative Response

  • If you have additional thoughts on how to improve Seattle's city government or to make Seattle a more livable and sustainable city, please note them here.

One of the best ways to improve city government is to improve the people running city government. I chose to run in this position because as an architect and neighborhood leader I am tired of the politics of obstructionism demonstrated in the incumbent. Simply saying "no" to proposed investments isn't enough. There is nothing wrong with principled dissent, but it must be accompanied by an alternative vision in order to be constructive and advance the dialogue on how we evolve as a better city.

In my 30 years of professional practice, I've found that the best way to accomplish a goal- from restoring an historic treasure to using green building standards to enhance an urban village-is to bring people together at the outset, assemble a great team around a shared vision, and take action in a way that is flexible enough to make needed changes, but rigorous enough to meet deadlines and budgets.

Making better policy that enhances our quality of life will take that kind of know-how, vision, and respect for others. It's why I am running for city council and I hope to earn your support!