The 20-year wait for Bremerton’s critical 6th Street ‘road diet’ is nearing reality. The City’s final recommended design is excellent, making smart design choices, improving crosswalks, and narrowing the four-lane street to three lanes — or three lanes to two. It would also be protected end to end, a first for Bremerton.

But in a last-minute memo, the City announced plans to remove 52% of plastic flex posts between downtown and the Charleston District, which excludes the part of the project where 6th becomes Kitsap Way. All bike protection would be removed downtown, and some flex posts are removed crossings nearest two elementary schools, where the protection is needed most.

The City claims the changes are needed to accommodate access for the Bremerton Fire Department (BFD) emergency routes. Its memo reiterates the need for “flexible post type bike lane physical separation,” with the big caveat of “excluding where the Bremerton Fire Department identifies emergency response concerns.” The department has interpreted this broadly to include where “…any physical separation installed would prevent vehicles from being able to pull to the curb with approaching emergency vehicles…”  

Approximately 168 flex posts would be removed from the ‘Concept Designs’ shared in September 2025, including 100% of the flex posts on the five blocks of 6th Street that pass through high-foot-traffic downtown. The two blocks surrounding 6th and Warren in downtown have the highest concentration of car-on-pedestrian collisions in Bremerton, and the human toll is real, including 10 car-on-pedestrian injury collisions since January 2020, one every seven months, according to the Washington State Patrol. 

The downtown section of 6th Street is precisely the kind of high-stress location where protective infrastructure is most effective.

Further west on 6th, the City would remove all plastic flex posts from the intersection of 6th and Olympic, the closest 6th Street crossing to Naval Avenue Elementary School. The original design highlighted 6th and Olympic for additional street safety, with lighted pedestrian crossing signs and a mid-street traffic island. Flex posts would also be removed from 6th at Veneta, just steps from Our Lady Star of the Sea elementary school. Bremerton has no ordinances on ‘school zones’.

The City also plans to cut flex posts from 6th Street’s eastbound approach to Callow Avenue, in the heart of the pedestrian-oriented Charleston shopping district.

It’s worth noting that 6th Street is flanked by two alternative east-west routes for first responders, 11th Street, which is five blocks away and Burwell Street (SR 304), three blocks away. Both 11th and Burwell are classified as ‘Principal Arterials’, while 6th is a Minor Arterial and will likely be downgraded after the road diet. Emergency vehicles have two alternative routes, each within five blocks of 6th. Why BFD needs a third high-speed thoroughfare in this narrow section of Bremerton is left unexplained by the Wheeler administration. 

Fire Depts and the ‘20-foot rule’

Like all urban fire departments, BFD has a critical job and absolutely must have unobstructed access on city streets. To ensure that access, cities follow best practices, like those found in the International Fire Code (IFC). Many cities, including Seattle, Bellevue and Bremerton adopted the IFC in lieu of writing its own fire code from scratch. 

The IFC contains the ‘20-foot rule’ for ensuring streets maintain access for fire trucks: 503.2.1 Dimensions: “Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm).” Of course many streets in Bremerton violate the 20-foot rule, when both-side parked cars squeeze narrow residential streets. But streets classified as ‘arterial’ or ‘collector’ must maintain that width.

At no point would 6th Street be narrower than 21.5 feet, with all flexposts installed. And the five-block downtown section of 6th Street, for instance, has no fewer than 17 driveways and alleyways that cars can use to evacuate the street if emergency vehicles need to pass. 

The City of Bremerton is claiming its fire trucks require more space than other cities and more than the IFC recommends. Never mind that missing flex posts attract delivery trucks and rideshare cars like flies on summer watermelon. Never mind that removing flex posts guarantees that average traffic speeds will increase or that pedestrians face longer street crossings.

The Wheeler administration has used this tactic before, to argue against street safety infrastructure. Late in the design process, they present highly technical information (logical fallacy: Appeal to Authority), which they claim trumps all other considerations. Late in the Warren Bridge design debate, the administration argued a 12-foot multimodal path made it impossible for under-bridge inspection trucks to maintain the bridge.

The fire chief and mayor believe they found a clever wedge issue: do you want bike lanes or do you support the life-saving first responders? But that’s a false choice. Bremerton can build protected bike lanes on 6th Street and still maintain the access, per International Fire Code, that BFD needs to do its important work.

BFD has an incredibly important job to do and the fire chief deserves a voice on street access for emergency vehicles. But there’s a lot of things on Bremerton streets that slow emergency responders: stoplights, parked cars, trash cans, Amazon trucks. Pitting bike lanes against emergency response is cynical and divisive.                                                                       

Unprotected bike lanes are sexist

When Los Angeles built a protected bike on Spring Street, the number of women riding bikes on the street increased 100%, a League of American Bicyclists study found. New Orleans’ South Carrollton Avenue saw 115% more women after the new bike lane went in. Philadelphia saw a 276% jump with one protected bike lane project.

A five-city study by Portland State University showed that all genders appreciate protected bike lanes, but women more so, “…both men and women overwhelmingly felt that the lanes increased their safety… [but] women bicyclists… have significantly more positive associations with the protected lanes than men.”

In cities with high-quality bike infrastructure, like San Francisco, Washington DC and Philadelphia, women account for at least 33% of cyclists. In cities without bike infrastructure, fewer than 20% of cyclists are women. Your correspondent estimates that fewer than 15% of Kitsap Transit Fast Ferry bike-on passengers are women.

Protected bike lanes have been proven to benefit not just cyclists, but also reduce pedestrian injury and death. Protected bike lanes reduced pedestrian injuries by 61% in Toronto, 28% in Montreal, and bike and pedestrian fatalities fell 69% in Chicago. 

Long awaited multimodal corridor

6th Avenue is critical to Bremeton’s nascent bike network. It’s the only east-west multimodal artery from Downtown, including the Shipyard and ferries, to all points west. First proposed in 2007, 6th Street is finally within reach. The 6th Street design presented in September isn’t perfect, but is damn good – protected end-to-end, which would be a first for any street in the city.

But the removal of hundreds of protective flex posts is a huge step backwards. Equally troubling is the backroom, last-minute veto by a City department. 

Unless City Council overrides Mayor Wheeler, as their ‘power of the purse’ allows, Bremerton will set the precedent that any future bike lane may be downgraded, at the whim of emergency services, or the sewer department or for some other reason.

That bodes ill for Bremerton’s future bike network, which envisions bike lanes on several streets which share the same ‘Minor Arterial’ designation as 6th Street. Presumably critical streets like Lebo, Sheridan, Sylvan, Riddel, Perry and Upper Kitsap Way would be ineligible for bike protection. The City will decide after planning is complete.

Do a pilot project, Bremerton

Pilot projects are flexible tools for testing and learning what works on the street. Flex posts are very easy to remove, requiring no special equipment. Bremerton should fully protect 6th Street, then monitor closely for any problems the new infrastructure creates. 

But Bremerton proposes the opposite: don’t build the protection, then may get around to it later: “Further design refinement and opportunities for additional bike lane physical separation (especially east of Warren Avenue) including use of other types of physical separation will continue to be evaluated.”

A city simply cannot learn if a design causes problems by not building it. Bremerton City Council has the authority to write an appropriation rider to the funding, to require that all planned flex posts be installed, on a pilot basis. Decisions to remove can be debated in the Public Works Committee. It would set an important precedent that – even in a Strong Mayor form of government, the elected officials closest to the people get a say in how their streets are built. 

City Council debates 6th Street on February 4th, 5:30pm at Bremerton City Hall. Please encourage city council to retain all the physical protection on the new 6th Street bike lanes, by emailing city.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us.

The post Op-Ed: Will Bremerton Build Its First Protected Bike Lane?  first appeared on The Urbanist.

For decades, Kitsap County has been trying – and mostly failing – to concentrate growth into compact areas that can be best served by schools and ambulances, sewers and sidewalks. Kitsap’s state-mandated solution, the so-called “Urban Growth Areas” (UGAs) have failed to attract growth. Since 2000, the vast majority of new housing has been built in rural Kitsap. 

Kitsap County’s proposed ‘Housing Element’ of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan has been declared ‘noncompliant under the Growth Management Act (GMA) by the Growth Management Hearing Board for overstating available housing, preventing infill housing and ignoring wildfire risks. This was the fourth time Kitsap County had its Comp Plan remanded, it also occurred in 2012 for oversizing UGA for the population, 2006 for allowing too much density in rural areas and 1998 for encouraging growth outside of cities. Kitsap County has been inviting sprawl for a long time.

Kitsap is Washington State’s third densest county, following King and Vancouver. And two thirds of those people — 190,000 — live in the area known as Greater Bremerton. Over the last 20 years, growth in Greater Bremerton has primarily sprouted outward, in mushrooming subdevelopments in the forests and farms around Bremerton, Port Orchard and Silverdale, as opposed to infill development within the existing urban footprint, as required by the GMA. 

Kitsap’s UGA: flawed from birth

Kitsap’s first attempt to define Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) in the 1996 Comprehensive Plan fell short of state requirements. The Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) invalidated the plan, ruling that the UGAs were too large and lacked density, while rural areas permitted inappropriate urban densities. This problem of sprawl persists today.

Despite placing strict limits on rural housing (e.g., 1 home per 5–20 acres), Kitsap County continually expands the boundaries of Urban Growth Areas to accommodate sprawl. The largest expansion occurred in 2006, when the Silverdale Urban Growth area doubled in size, from 3,456 acres to its current 7,400 acres, enclosing thousands of acres of prime greenfield for suburban sprawl. Kitsap County has expanded the area of its UGAs in every Comp Plan since 2006, except the most recent one.

Kitsap’s newest sprawling development is Royal Valley, a bucolic 165-acre farm that was previously zoned for one home per 5 acres. Royal Valley was outside of the original UGA boundaries, which were stretched in 2012 to accommodate housing. The land was upzoned to 10 per acre in 2016. And thus, the Royal Valley became ‘urban’ and ready for sprawl.

Despite stretching boundaries, the vast majority of housing development has sprouted up outside of Kitsap’s UGAs over the past 25 years. Kitsap County has added homes in the least sustainable way possible, creating high rural density, without sidewalks, buses or new schools. 

In August 2025, Kitsap’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan was remanded (aka, sent back for a do-over) by the Growth Management Hearing Board. In particular, Kitsap County “failed to identify sufficient capacity of land for housing for all income groups… in particular for the low, very low, extremely low, and moderate-income levels…” Additionally, the County was cited for thumbing its nose at wildfire risk, because it did “not include multimodal emergency and evacuation routes… nor does it direct growth away from the wildland urban interface… as required by the GMA.” The remand was the result of a lawsuit from the nonprofit advocacy group Futurewise, which specializes in sustainable land use policy. 

A new plan for Silverdale’s Regional Growth Center

In 2006, a portion of Silverdale’s UGA was designated a “Regional Growth Center” (RGC) by the new Puget Sound Regional Council. The ‘primary goal’ of RGCs is to “concentrate the region’s future population and job growth into dense, walkable, and transit-connected urban hubs’. 

The UGA has been expanded multiple times, but not in 2024. To understand why, it’s helpful to know that Silverdale’s UGA and its growth center have very different boundaries. Silverdale’s 7,400-acre UGA is nearly nine times larger than the Silverdale Regional Growth Center, with just 848 acres. Housing is affected, as developers have preferred to build single family housing in the UGA’s vast unbuilt farms and forests, rather than concentrate multifamily units in the little designated center. 

But the County’s reliance on exurban sprawl has left the Silverdale RGC dangerously close to losing federal transportation funds, due to falling below minimum ‘activity units’ (1 job + 1 housing unit = 2 activity units). Silverdale is required to have 18 activity units per acre but only had 17.3 units in a recent update. And the requirement will grow to 44 activity units per acre in 2044, a tall order for an area that’s added virtually zero new housing in 25 years. 

Kitsap County is scrambling to rewrite the Silverdale Center Plan to create more dense housing and encourage multimodal travel. The Plan’s December 2025 update, envisions “trail-oriented development” to create “a contiguous fabric of walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods” and “diverse, affordable, and higher-density housing choices” and a “low-stress network” of enhanced sidewalks and multiuse trails to connect the waterfront, shopping, medical and cultural facilities. It introduces the worthy idea of ‘park once and walk’ to complete errands in the Center.

The RGC Plan envisions dense, multi-use developments on parking infill. That sounds fabulous – exactly what Silverdale plans and residents have been wanting for years. To date, no infill projects have been filed in Silverdale. Kitsap’s Director of Community Development points out that “much of the land within Regional Center has […] limited near-term redevelopment feasibility. Redevelopment in these areas often requires parcel assembly, utility upgrades, environmental review, and higher upfront costs.”

The Silverdale Center Plan transportation elements are quite good, but unfunded. The Plan proposes interconnected trails and ‘low-stress’ bike lanes. But the RGC trails have no logical connection either to the rest of Silverdale UGA, nor north or south to the cities of Bremerton and Poulsbo. And every bike lane that’s ever been built in Silverdale is unsafe, stressful and unprotected. Further, Silverdale RGC Plan multimodal paths have no funding, unlike Kitsap’s unrelenting street widening program. 

More sprawl, more roads… repeat forever

Kitsap County has several major “traffic capacity” projects planned. Massive street expansions within the Silverdale Regional Growth Center are already complete: Silverdale Way, Bucklin Hill Road and upper Ridgetop Boulevard. While these projects, outlined in the Silverdale Transportation Improvement Plan, include multimodal fig leaves, the finished projects fall well short of goals because they build narrow sidewalks and lowest common denominator bike lanes, which are neither low stress nor “Complete Streets.”

The next self-destructive project is Phase 2 of the Ridgetop Boulevard Corridor Widening project, which will expand a short stretch of street from three to five lanes for a massive price tag of $13.7 million for just 0.24-miles. At $57 million per mile, it’s probably the most expensive Kitsap County streets projects ever, owing to the need to buy private property from the likes of Dairy Queen and Wells Fargo. 

Ridgetop’s widening violates every element of the Silverdale Center Plan. As currently planned, it does not contribute to a low-stress multimodal network. The new five-lane street will increase crashes and car speeds, and restrict pedestrians from crossing the giant stroad. It does include a crappy, unprotected bike lane, but it will fall far short of plans for Complete Streets. 

A much better Ridgetop would pull the useless paint-only bike lanes off the street and use the same space for a multi-use trail. Two five-foot bike lanes plus a five-foot sidewalk would make a wonderful 15-foot-wide trail, a first step towards the trail network envisioned in the Silverdale Regional Center plan. Better yet, cancel the street widening entirely and dedicate that $13.7 million to building out the multi-use trail network. 

The Puget Sound Regional Council, which oversees the Ridgetop funding could be helpful here – pointing out that Kitsap continues to cash checks for projects that fail to meet PSRC goals. But they probably won’t. PSRC policy enforcement tends to be toothless. Indeed, PSRC is all too willing to fund road expansion projects with the barest minimum of multimodal infrastructure. 

Kitsap: the status quo is broken

For nearly 30 years, Kitsap County has passed strategic plans which claim to concentrate growth into UGAs, decrease vehicle traffic and support multimodal transportation. Kitsap County has expanded the area of its various UGAs during every single comp plan, since the first – with the notable exception of the most recent, 2024 Plan, which keeps boundaries the same for the first time. The repeated expansions of the UGAs designates new farms and forests for sprawl.

It’s not too late for Kitsap County to bend the curve on forest destruction, traffic growth and sprawl, and build the walkable communities that 30 years of Comprehensive Plans have called for. But it must break with the status quo of prioritizing rural subdivisions above concentrated development. The future will be decided by three county commissioners this spring. 

To change the status quo, Kitsap County should consider three policy changes:

1. Downzone (allow less housing) and restrict subdivision of all large farm and forest parcels, whether inside or outside of UGAs.
2. Offer tax incentives for infill development across all Kitsap County UGAs.
3. Halt road widening road projects that invite additional traffic congestion and instead focus new transportation spending on multimodal corridors that encourage walking, rolling, biking, and transit use.  

Commissioners will meet to discuss the Kitsap Comprehensive Plan remand on January 7, 2026 at 10am. Written comments should be addressed to ddaniels@kitsap.gov. Or attend the meetingin person or via Zoom video conference.

The post Op-Ed: Why Kitsap County Can’t Stop Sprawling first appeared on The Urbanist.

Not only has the Bainbridge Island City Council not yet started to review a draft of the city’s updated Comprehensive Plan, which lays out the zoning changes needed to accommodate anticipated housing growth through 2044, the city’s Planning Commission has spent most of this year spinning its wheels.

Despite meeting at an intense pace — it’s on track to log around 30 meetings in 2025 alone — the commission is nowhere close to making a final recommendation. For many of those meetings, the commission had been trying to come to a unanimous consensus on its decisions, which is a very high bar to clear when it comes to contentious housing issues.

At recent city council meetings, updates on the status of the plan have started to include details about state sanctions that could be imposed on Bainbridge Island if the city doesn’t get into compliance. Rarely imposed, those sanctions could include additional scrutiny of Bainbridge’s planning under the new Housing Accountability Act, ineligibility to apply for state grants, and, in extreme circumstances, direct sanctions from Governor Bob Ferguson, including the withholding of the city’s existing revenue streams.

The issue that is proving so intractable in Bainbridge is how Winslow, the immediate area around the state ferry terminal that’s home to the bulk of the city’s housing density and commercial activity, will be rezoned to bring the city into compliance with new state requirements. It’s been a full year since The Urbanist reported on Bainbridge’s attempts to come to grips with the impact of 2021’s House Bill 1220, a law that requires cities to grapple with how to make room for their share of county growth targets and to plan housing that is attainable for low- and middle-income earners. In Bainbridge’s case, Kitsap County’s housing growth target through 2044 for the city is 1,977 units.

At 28 square miles, Bainbridge Island has plenty of space. In the past, cities like Bainbridge have been able to rely on ample capacity for new low-density housing to clear the bar of their housing growth targets, but HB 1220 requires cities to look more closely at the expected income levels of future residents. With new lower income households — people who may already be working on the Island as grocery clerks, teachers, or restaurant workers — unable to afford new single-family homes, that means allowing denser housing.

With scant progress to be shown after months of process, this summer the City retained Joe Tovar, a professor at the University of Washington’s College of Built Environment who has previously served on the state’s Growth Management Hearings Board, as a consultant get things back on track. With Tovar’s direction, the Council just this month adopted an updated schedule that the city will try to follow, with an ultimate goal of adopting a new Comprehensive Plan by next June — 18 months behind schedule.

Tovar is drawing the line in the sand then, due to a $722,500 grant earmarked by a Washington Department of Ecology to manage stormwater runoff around north Bainbridge’s Manzanita Creek — money that is likely to be pulled back if the city isn’t in compliance with the GMA by then. That will mean focusing on the elements of the plan that are absolutely essential, like the future land use map.

“That’s not going to be easy, and it’s going to require doing a number of things that won’t be comfortable and that many people will not agree with,” Tovar told the council in late October. “Unless you can take some bold actions along the lines of what I’m recommending to you here — [or] something like them — you won’t be done for a while. You might be having this conversation a year from now. You might be approaching 24 months behind schedule, and that has consequences and implications and risks.”

But even with that new deadline, it remains to be seen how the city’s decision makers — on both the planning commission and the city council — will be able to move forward, in the face of significant disagreement about how the City should approach its state mandates. At the planning commission, there has been significant disagreement even about the goals, with some commissioners arguing that they should be focused on the minimum required to meet the HB 1220 requirements, and others arguing the city should be using those requirements to meet broader community goals.

“There are a lot of reasons for increasing density in our urban core, and one of them is the opportunity to create more affordable housing. There are others, like creating a more vibrant community, like creating a more sustainable community,” Commissioner Ben Deines said at a commission meeting earlier this month. “What I’ve been hearing from the community is that we want a more livable community, that people who have kids, families with kids, want to be able to be able to live here. People who work at the grocery store want to be able to live here.”

Pushing the plan’s completion into next year is also poised to introduce another major variable: two new councilmembers, both of whom are likely to represent a change in direction when it comes to growth issues. Lara Lant, who handily trounced incumbent two-term Councilmember Joe Deets, has spoken about the need to take “creative approaches” to housing growth that don’t mean “mean cookie-cutter solutions or sacrificing local character.”

Mike Nelson, who won the race for an open council seat against current planning commission chair Sarah Blossom, has been even more clear about where he stands on the idea of increasing housing capacity in Winslow to comply with HB 1220.

“I oppose the City Council’s plan to massively upzone our historic downtown Winslow. The most recent Planning Commission recommendation was for a Winslow characterized by 6 story buildings and ultra-density, including ultra-dense condo-complexes like you see across Seattle,” Nelson’s campaign website states, despite the fact that the planning commission hasn’t yet released a recommendation. “I believe the upzoning plan will destroy the special character of the Island, strain our natural resources, strain our infrastructure, cause congestion, and increase taxes, all without meaningfully addressing housing affordability.”

Both candidates opposed the city’s most high-profile move on affordable housing, a plan to build 90 units of workforce housing at the site of a former police station at the Island’s front door. They are likely to form a bloc with Kirsten Hytopoulos, who has often been the sole no vote on council in recent years on housing issues. While not a full majority, their addition to the council is likely to leave the body more fractured.

At a meeting earlier this month, Hytopoulos declined to sign onto the resolution adopting the new timeline for plan adoption, raising a number of concerns around the process. She argued that the city is putting the cart before the horse if it considers zoning changes without looking directly at strategies needed to meet the HB 1220 requirements.

“My concern is the planning commission cannot be asked to make their findings regarding zoning changes to Winslow before they identify the strategies — the housing strategies — we will adopt to support the development of affordable housing. [HB] 1220 is ultimately about strategies, and upzoning is just one strategy. Without knowing what our strategies are, there is no way to make intelligent decisions about how many more units we need in Winslow,” Hytopoulos said. “In light of the limitations of our sewer plant and of groundwater, it is irresponsible to haphazardly upzone any area of Winslow without clear connection between that upzoning and the likely development of tiers of affordability that we’re required to provide and are not already available in our capacity.”

Hytopoulos’s comments also highlighted a thread that has run through growth conversations in Bainbridge Island for a long time: a distrust of City staff to make decisions around the details of plans and how to implement them, despite the fact that the City Council is a part-time body. Her comments came ahead of the announcement this month that Bainbridge Island City Manager Blair King would be stepping down from his role early in 2026.

“It’s mindboggling — sorry for that word, it’s a little bit hot — that we are saying the solution is to send much of the remaining work back to the back room with staff and consultants, as that’s how we got in this mess in the first place,” Hytopoulos continued.

All told, the factors involved in any discussion of housing on Bainbridge make even adopting a plan next summer a tall order. But having a deadline that may not be achieved could be better than not having one at all. Meanwhile, Bainbridge Island’s housing stock isn’t getting any more affordable to its residents, who continue to be facing the potential of being priced out, and forced into long commutes from outside the city.

The post Bainbridge Island Struggles to Update Growth Plan, Months Behind State Deadline first appeared on The Urbanist.

Specific bright spots include Tacoma, Redmond, Burien, Woodinville, and Newcastle, where pro-growth candidates all currently lead. Which isn’t to say there wasn’t some backsliding: early results in Bainbridge Island and Sammamish point to a big housing backlash. But on the whole, the trends so far look cheer-worthy for urbanists.

Eastside

Bellevue‘s city council isn’t poised to see a seismic shift in composition, with incumbents Lynne Robinson, Jared Nieuwenhuis, Claire Sumadiwirya, and Vishal Bhargava all leading in their races. But eight-term Councilmember Conrad Lee’s career appears over, with human rights advocate Naren Briar leading Lee by nearly three points. With this council, Mo Malakoutian looks well-positioned to be the city’s next mayor.

Meanwhile voters in Redmond have resoundingly re-elected urbanist superstar Melissa Stuart, while at the same time sending Steve Fields and Jeralee Anderson packing. Fields and Anderson were the two voices on the council who opposed Redmond’s move to relocate the canceled Plymouth Housing project from Kenmore, an issue that right-leaning groups like Safe Eastside tried to turn into a central campaign issue — and failed at.

In Woodinville, the wave of cash spent by Coinbase cryptocurrency engineer Jeff Lyon to promote slow growth candidates appears to have fully backfired, with promoted candidate Rachel Best-Campbell losing in a landslide to challenger Amber Wise. Lyon himself is also losing to incumbent Michelle Evans, with fellow incumbents Sarah Arndt and James Randolph also doing fine.

Results in Kirkland were more mixed on election night.

Incumbent Neal Black, who has defended the city’s direction on housing densification, looks to be holding on while his colleague, Deputy Mayor Jay Arnold, is currently trailing Ken Oberman. Oberman is a part of the “sanity slate” promoted by the group Cherish Kirkland, explicitly formed to push back on proposals to consider allowing additional housing near Kirkland’s transit corridors. Catie Malik, another slate member, leads pro-growth candidate Shilpa Prem, but only by a hair — less than 300 votes. Both Arnold and Prem could be poised to take the lead, based on returns in the coming days. Finally, Jon Pascal, the only incumbent running who voted against the city’s growth plan last year, is leading significantly against Kurt Dresner, a leader with the urbanist group Liveable Kirkland — that lead looks harder to surmount.

Another election update: progressive candidates Shilpa Prem and Jay Arnold have TAKEN THE LEAD in their races for the Kirkland City Council after previously being behind. So much for that reactionary anti-growth backlash in Kirkland.

— Ryan Packer (@typewriteralley.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 4:13 PM

Meanwhile, Sammamish appears to be entering a full-on housing backlash era, with Mayor Karen Howe way behind Debbie Treen, a former mayor of Bothell and wife of another serving councilmember, Kent Treen. Councilmember Sid Gupta is set to lose his seat, with his colleague Amy Lam likely only retaining her seat due to a write-in campaign siphoning votes from her opponent. And Michael Boyer is set to win a race for an open seat on the council against more pro-growth Lin Yang. At the heart of all these races is the Town Center Plan, and the current council’s consideration of alternatives to double the upper limit on growth that the city is planning for over the long term.

We also cannot leave out Newcastle, where progressives made a full sweep including incumbent Paul Charbonneau, and Chris Villasenor, Karin Frost Blakley, and Andy Jacobs, bringing the city to a full 6-1 Democratic majority for the first time in the city’s 31-year history.

And in Bothell, progressive incumbents Jenne Alderks and Rami Al-Kabra are cruising to re-election, while uncontested races see Prasad Anguluri and Brittany Miles joining the council.

North King and Snohomish County

Everett Mayor Cassie Franklin looks poised to hold onto her seat for another term, after facing a right-leaning challenge focused on crime and homelessness from Scott Murphy. As a member of the Sound Transit board, expect Franklin to continue pushing for the completion of the light rail “spine” between Tacoma and Everett, and to de-prioritize other light rail projects (like those in Seattle).

The race for mayor of Lynnwood remains too close to call, with incumbent mayor Christine Frizzell trailing challenger and longtime councilmember George Hurst. Frizzell also serves on the Sound Transit board as one of its less outspoken members. On Lynnwood Council, Josh Binda is set to lose his seat after being involved in several high-profile ethics investigations. Incumbents Robert Leutwyler and Derica Escamilla are set to be retained, with more urbanist-leaning Isabel Mata winning an open seat.

In Edmonds, voters are set to re-elect pro-housing Chris Eck, but pick small business advocate Erika Barnett over the more urbanist-leaning Alex Newman for the open position 3 seat. Incumbent Will Chen will secure another term, but the biggest news to come out of Edmonds on election night was the wholehearted rejection of a ballot measure that would have raised taxes to salvage the city’s dire budget situation.

Lake Forest Park urbanist Josh Rosenau is absolutely within striking distance of beating incumbent John Lebo, trailing by only 14 votes as of Wednesday.

Meanwhile Kenmore voters reelected Nigel Herbig despite his support for the Plymouth Housing project that was ultimately moved to Redmond.

Meanwhile in Kenmore, progressive council candidate @tracyforkenmore.bsky.social is now just 37 votes behind her opponent, Joe Marshall.

[image or embed]

— Ryan Packer (@typewriteralley.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 4:22 PM

Voters in Shoreline only faced a decision in one council race, with Chris Roberts, Eben Pobee and Laura Mork all running for re-election unopposed. The only open seat, currently filled by retiring John Ramsdell, is poised to be held by Valerie Snider, who campaigned on a platform of tree preservation and has voiced skepticism for Shoreline’s full-throated support of transit-oriented development.

South King County

When it comes to the King County Council, 30-year incumbent Pete von Reichbauer is coasting to another term against challenger Maya Vengadasalam in District 7. In the open race for District 5, attorney Steffanie Fain is narrowly ahead of SeaTac Councilmember Peter Kwon to fill the seat currently occupied by appointed Councilmember De’Sean Quinn. Progressives split on that race in the primary between Renton Councilmembers Kim-Khanh Van and Ryan McIrvin, leading to two more right-leaning candidates advancing into the primary. In the end, both The Stranger and the Seattle Times endorsed Fain, with The Urbanist making no recommendation.

Speaking of Renton: incumbents are leading in all races there, with James Alberson, Carmen Rivera, and Ruth Pérez all likely to secure an additional term on the Renton Council.

Federal Way, Kent, and Auburn will all retain their mayors, with Kent Mayor Dana Ralph running unopposed.

But the bright spot in South King County is in Burien, where an existing 5-2 moderate majority is poised to flip. Sam Méndez is on track to replace outgoing Councilmember Jimmy Matta, with former planning commissioner Rocco DeVito on track to beat incumbent Stephanie Mora. The council’s two left-leaning incumbents — Sarah Moore and Hugo Garcia — likely to retain their seats. This fall, that slate of four candidates was endorsed by Representative Pramila Jayapal, a big boost for progressives in Burien. The Urbanist Elections Committee also backed the slate.

Pierce County

In South Sound, incumbent Bryan Yambe will retain his seat on the Pierce County Council, maintaining the existing 4-3 Democratic majority on that body. That’s good news for Executive Ryan Mello, who just took office at the beginning of the year as the first Democrat to lead the county in eight years.

Tacoma‘s next mayor will be Anders Ibsen, after incumbent Victoria Woodards hit the limit of two terms in that job. A former member of the Tacoma Council, Ibsen is leading current councilmember John Hines despite more than $100,000 in outside spending in Hines’s favor. That spending went fairly negative on Ibsen, in a move that may have actually backfired.

On the Tacoma City Council, Latasha Palmer is set to replace outgoing Deputy Mayor Kiara Daniels. Palmer will likely defeat property manager Jessica Johnston in a campaign that saw Palmer support the idea of implementing social housing in Tacoma and Johnston oppose the move. Sandesh Sadalge, who was appointed to his seat last July, looks on track to retain his seat despite a strong challenge from Silong Chhun, and incumbents Sarah Rumbaugh and Joe Bushnell are also set to stay on the council. Ultimately, the results point to voters’ support for the council’s current trajectory on housing, including the Home in Tacoma plan.

Kitsap County

Across the Sound in Kitsap County, there are fewer signs of hope for urbanist candidates.

Transportation advocates in Bremerton will be disappointed to see Councilmember Jeff Coughlin trailing incumbent Mayor Greg Wheeler. Wheeler, who opposed the Bremerton Council’s recent move to ditch parking mandates across the city, has nonetheless vowed to prioritize the issue in his next term, with Coughlin’s challenge likely sharpening those promises.

In Bainbridge Island as in Sammamish, a strong housing backlash looks to propel several anti-growth candidates into office. Incumbent Joe Deets, an outspoken supporter of the 625 Winslow Way affordable housing project, is on track to lose to Lara Lant, who explicitly opposed the project. Meanwhile Clarence Moriwaki, who has been more moderate on housing issues, is likely to be reelected.

For the open seat, currently occupied by Jon Quitslund, voters had to choose between two candidates who have opposed the 625 Winslow Way project as designed, including current planning commission chair Sarah Blossom, who voted against a zoning ordinance that would allow it to move forward. Instead, they look to have picked Mike Nelson, a candidate who has held an even harder line on housing, opposing “ultra-density” within the city’s main downtown of Winslow during the campaign.

The post Pro-Housing Candidates Make Gains All Around Puget Sound first appeared on The Urbanist.

The building planned at 625 Winslow Way would add 92 units of workforce housing to Bainbridge’s front door. But it has met considerable opposition from Island residents in recent months who have pushed back on the idea of building subsidized housing in such a prominent location.

The delay means the building’s developer, the Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI), will likely be less competitive for this year’s tranche of state affordable housing funds. But so far LIHI has not signaled any intent to back off on moving the project forward.

Building four stories of affordable housing in Bainbridge’s “Ferry District” is likely to be allowed by-right after the city adopts an updated Comprehensive Plan and associated development regulations, but that work is months behind schedule as the city’s planning commission works through the plan’s minutiae — with over 25 separate meetings so far this year alone on the topic.

To advance the 625 Winslow Way project in the face of that delay, the council was set to consider an ordinance granting additional zoning capacity only to affordable housing projects within the general vicinity of the ferry terminal, east of State Route 305. But in late September, Bainbridge resident Dawn Janow filed an appeal of that ordinance’s validity under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Janow had just finished third in a three-way race for the open council seat currently held by retiring Councilmember Jon Quitslund in the August primary election, on a platform of “limiting upzoning” throughout the Island’s main business district of Winslow.

Bainbridge Island’s Planning Commission had already signed off on the zoning ordinance, via a 4-2 vote at the end of a marathon, 7.5-hour meeting in early September. And the city had already completed a 4,000-page environmental site assessment for the site last year, with LIHI still due to complete another environmental analysis as part of receiving their project permits. But Janow’s appeal means a detour to the city’s Hearing Examiner that could take weeks if not months to resolve.

In an interview conducted in August, well before the appeal was filed, Janow told The Urbanist that she thought a project like 625 Winslow was too big for a city of Bainbridge Island’s size, and that the city should be focused on smaller-scale affordable housing projects.

“When we take a look at a project like this, that the city is donating $3 million to, and they spent a million to purchase this property. We don’t know what it’s going to cost long-term in terms of water, sewer, any studies that need to be done to get the thing built, the whole story, and then we’re going to build this 90-unit or 100-unit place, and we really don’t have the services to meet the needs of those folks at that very low income bracket. And we do have a housing resources board that’s actually moving along quite well, putting smaller, affordable housing units on the island,” Janow said.

Unlike other LIHI buildings aimed at providing homes for folks directly exiting homelessness with very little income, the Winslow project is aimed at households making 50 to 60% of Kitsap County’s median income, or around $60,000 per year or less, with some residents earning up to 80%. The goal is to provide homes close to Winslow businesses and transit for the city’s rank-and-file workers, who have been increasingly priced out of Bainbridge over the past few decades.

Under a new state law that requires cities to plan for future housing growth by expected income level, Bainbridge needs to accommodate 272 new households in that income range though 2044, along with 867 households earning less — a mandate the city is still grappling with. But Janow, a member of the Bainbridge Island Metro Park and Recreation District board, said that she wanted affordable housing projects to be better integrated into neighborhoods.

“What we’ve been able to do is gradually integrate these low income and affordable housing and mixed income [projects] — I’m very much interested in that — into neighborhoods, and so it’s a little bit less also destigmatizing, but it’s taken off in manageable chunks, which really then gets an opportunity for our services to get up to speed, and it gives an opportunity for people to be integrated into the community in a really sort of natural and consistent way, versus, like, boom, one and done,” Janow said.

While the Bainbridge Island city council had signaled a desire to scale back the 625 Winslow project to around 70 units, a move that would likely have limited the building’s height, the ordinance approved by the planning commission last month included enough development capacity for the full 92 units. The idea of advancing a smaller building here didn’t seem to placate many opponents, with a sizable contingent of city residents still looking to “Save the Corner” for a different type of civic use, and project proponents still wanting to see the full building move forward to provide the maximum amount of affordable housing.

Ultimately, final approval will be up to the city council, after the appeal is dealt with.

“As the developer for this housing community, we are hopeful for a positive outcome with the Hearing Examiner, and don’t anticipate it slowing the process down in any meaningful way,” Jon Grant, LIHI’s Chief Strategy Officer, told The Urbanist.

A hearing on Janow’s appeal has not yet been scheduled.

The post Beleaguered Bainbridge Island Affordable Housing Project Hits Another Snag first appeared on The Urbanist.

The August 1 ruling was the first major challenge to a local Comprehensive Plan under 2021’s House Bill 1220. The state’s new law directed local governments to get more specific about the anticipated income levels of future residents, and “make adequate provisions” for the future housing needs of those residents. An appeal brought by the land use advocacy nonprofit Futurewise and two Mercer Island residents argued Mercer Island didn’t do that.

The hearings board found that Mercer Island’s move to allow a few additional stories of height on potential new buildings within its Town Center neighborhood close to I-90 didn’t go far enough in accommodating those expected future residents, and that the City assumed much higher rates of affordable housing production than Mercer Island has historically seen. If Mercer Island decides against appealing the decision, it will have a year to comply with the new state requirements.

In clarifying what cities are required to do — and can’t do — to comply with HB 1220’s new requirements, the board set a strong precedent for future challenges to local growth plans, and other cities around the region appear to be taking notice.

In Bainbridge Island, where city leaders are months behind schedule in adopting an updated growth plan, the Mercer Island ruling is likely to send city officials sharpening their pencils to ensure they’re in compliance. At a meeting earlier this month, the Bainbridge Island City Council enlisted the help of City Attorney Jim Haney to come to grips with the ruling’s implications in their city, which is facing very similar targets for accommodating lower-income housing as in Mercer Island.

Out of the nearly 2,000 new units of housing Bainbridge needs to plan for through 2044, around half need to be geared toward families making at or below 80% of Kitsap County’s median income — around $77,000 for a family of two. Within Bainbridge Island itself, the median income is more than double that. A median Bainbridge home currently sells for $1.4 million, according to data from RedFin.

“The growth board very clearly said the game has changed from what it was prior to the enactment of HB 1220,” Haney told the council. “You are now required to actually plan for and plan to accommodate affordable housing, and it’s no longer the game of, we’re going to encourage affordable housing and rely upon that encouragement to get it.”

HB 1220’s affordability requirements have already become a well-known concept on Bainbridge Island. Incentivizing more affordable housing within the denser Winslow area dominated discussions around the city’s 20-year growth plan. So far the Bainbridge Island planning commission has held nearly 20 meetings fine-tuning that plan, with no end in sight.

Meanwhile, a plan to directly help to fund 92 units of affordable housing near the state ferry terminal in Winslow has been subjected to considerable pushback, which doesn’t auger well for the city’s ability to actually scale up more projects like it. Last week, the Bainbridge Council voted 6-1 to ask the project’s developer, the Low Income Housing Institute, to come back with a proposal for 70 units instead.

Haney spelled out the fact that the precedent set in Mercer Island actually requires cities to back up their plans for potential affordable units with concrete plans.

“The growth board is saying that if you’re going to rely on a publicly funded incentive program to provide some of the affordable housing that you’re talking about, you need to fund that program,” Haney said. “You cannot simply say in your plan, okay, we recognize that the land values are so high that in the city — which they are in Mercer Island and which probably applies to Bainbridge Island as well — you can’t just say, well, there’s we’re going to have to provide public incentives, somehow. You have to actually have a plan to provide those public incentives to make it work.”

In Clyde Hill, one of the Seattle metro area’s smallest cities, the new ruling is also clearly making waves. While the city of 3,000 residents tucked between Medina and Downtown Bellevue had already adopted a Comprehensive Plan this spring, it too was challenged by Futurewise for not being in compliance with the new state requirements. An official hearing hasn’t yet been held, and the City and Futurewise are still in negotiations around a potential settlement. Clyde Hill is also in conversations with the Puget Sound Regional Council, which certifies local growth plans, around potential changes.

Clyde Hill is clearly trying to figure out how to get in compliance without direct state prompting, but that may prove to be a tall order. Its city government is in the midst of a tumultuous period, with Clyde Hill Mayor Steve Friedman announcing plans to resign in early September. His departure comes among heightened concerns around the city’s long-term financial solvency, and after a standoff between the city council over how to approach those issues that saw Friedman veto a decision to eliminate Clyde Hill’s city administrator position, which likely would have destabilized Clyde Hill city government.

While Clyde Hill’s 20-year housing growth target, allocated by King County, is just 10 units, the city’s land use framework is essentially designed to lock out any potential new lower-income households, putting the city at odds with HB 1220’s basic framework. All of the affordable housing the city has supported, via contributions to A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH), has been built outside city limits.

At an early August meeting, Clyde Hill councilmembers discussed a list of “recommended actions” to bring the city into compliance. When it comes to housing, the document was the first confirmation that the city’s administrators are considering making zoning changes to respond to these state requirements, creating areas in the city where an affordable apartment building could potentially be built with local or state subsidies.

“[A] Proposal [is] currently under review to establish new regulations for new zoning districts of higher densities, program options through ARCH membership, and support private/public partnership programs by Council in concert with response to PSRC certification concerns and Futurewise action again City at GMHB,” the document stated.

In a statement posted to the city’s website, City administrators confirmed that it was reviewing the Mercer Island decision, declining to respond directly to The Urbanist’s questions.

“That decision provides welcome clarity to all cities about how state requirements apply when planning for affordable housing,” the post stated. “Clyde Hill remains committed to proceeding thoughtfully and in full compliance with state mandates, and to supporting the development of affordable housing both locally and through regional efforts such as our membership in A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH). As this work continues, resident feedback will play a crucial role in shaping how Clyde Hill approaches the path ahead.”

But city leaders are far from united on a path forward, with multiple councilmembers pushing back on the idea of making substantive changes, and pointing to the city’s small size and its current financial situation.

“Futurewise appears to have a particular vision for Clyde Hill, which represents about 1/10th of one percent of the King County[‘s] 1,000,000 residences, and as most are aware, our City has experienced financial deficits for years,” Councilmember Steve Sinwell stated in a document framing his viewpoint ahead of the meeting. “It is premature to commence any meaningful effort or incur consulting fees on contemplating any updates of the Clyde Hill Municipal Code that seek to achieve consistency with the City’s adopted 2024 Comprehensive Plan.”

“Given that the City is forecasted to run out of money by 2030, I’m at a loss to understand how we could possibly encourage affordable housing via incentives,” Clyde Hill Councilmember Wissner-Slivka wrote an email sent in lieu of her attendance at the meeting. “And before the City allocates any resources to adopt code that would enable new [i]nclusionary zoning districts of higher densities, I believe that we need to better understand how current residents would be impacted.”

Bainbridge Island and Clyde Hill will be far from the last cities to reckon with the new state framework forcing cities to act more aggressively when it comes to planning for affordable housing. But, like crash-test dummies, they will take the first impacts and provide lessons for everyone else.

The post Cities Grapple With ‘Game-Changing’ Impact of Mercer Island Housing Plan Ruling first appeared on The Urbanist.

The city council has been planning an affordable housing project at the 625 Winslow Way site since 2022, and unanimously approved a development agreement with the Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI) this past May to build and operate it via a long-term ground lease. But the project still needs approval to exceed the existing development standards on the site, and the Bainbridge Island planning commission just last week voted against consideration of an ordinance that would have allowed the 92-unit design to move forward.

The idea to scale back to approximately 70 units came from LIHI, which is among the largest providers of low-income housing in the region. Pushback prompted the nonprofit to look for a way to stay within the existing 45-foot height limit and provide something closer to Bainbridge Island’s current requirement of one parking stall for every unit, without including a massive parking structure. That’s in spite of the fact that the city initially solicited non-profit partners to build 100 units, with LIHI developing the 92-unit design in order to provide more family-sized units on the odd-sized lot.

And it’s also in spite of the fact that LIHI’s original proposal was already set to meet the existing height limit directly along Winslow Way, with the taller sections of the building less visible. Many cities in the region exclude the height of roof access structures from average building height, but not Bainbridge Island.

The idea of a smaller building likely won’t appease many of the project’s critics — including those looking to “Save the Corner” and build some type of civic amenity on the site instead. Nonetheless, the majority of councilmembers seemed eager to grab onto a compromise measure that would address some of the community concerns they’d been hearing. Only Councilmember Leslie Schneider opposed the motion.

“I hear what we lose by reducing the number of units,” Deputy Mayor John Quitslund said ahead of the vote. “At the same time, I think we are gaining a much broader acceptance and some possibility for more elegance in the building’s design, and that is important to me.”

“I actually think that if we scale this down, so that it can fit better on the site, and if we have adequate parking, we are pleasing the people who are going to live there,” Councilmember Kirsten Hytopoulos said. “It doesn’t look good. It looks like affordable housing, so I think people will be prouder to live there if it’s something that’s not an eyesore.”

Hytopoulos, who has been the 92-unit proposal’s biggest critic on the council, chastised those who painted Bainbridge Islanders raising concerns as being opposed to affordable housing.

“I think I feel really insulted as a community member, if I had to continue to be lectured on whether we need affordable housing,” Hytopoulos said. “Everybody in this community knows we really, really need it, that we have a huge deficit, that there are 50 reasons it’s good for us, individually and as a community. So it’s a straw man argument at this point, and it’s kind of bullying to the community to say, if you’re if you think it should be 70 units instead of 100, if you think there should be one parking stall per unit that somehow you don’t really understand the affordable housing crisis, and I think we all do.”

Councilmember Joe Deets told his colleagues that he sees scaling back the building as a path to building more affordable housing projects throughout Bainbridge Island.

“Yes, we lose 20 units. Perhaps it makes us more or less competitive, but 70 is better than nothing,” Deets said. “And not only that, remember, folks, this is not the end game. This isn’t like we do this and we’re done. Okay? We need to do this project. We need community buy-in to do it. I’m stating a strategy out loud here. If this is acceptable to the community, we can do more projects.”

Schneider, the only dissenting vote, noted that the number of units that the council is looking to cut would represent a sizable affordable housing project elsewhere.

“We just treasure the affordable housing projects that give us 20 units right now, and they are massively difficult to build,” Schneider said, citing smaller scale projects built by Housing Resources Bainbridge. “These are really hard projects to do, and I don’t know how many more opportunities we’re going to have to do more of them. We’re losing 20 units off of a large place.”

Councilmember Brenda Fantroy-Johnson, who ultimately voted for the motion, also pushed back on the idea of shrinking the project.

“When we look on the wall, and it says what our priorities are, and it says climate, and we’re haggling over how many parking spaces for people to drive around and pollute the air, and we’re talking about affordable housing, but we’re going to chop off the top floor and have less people who can move in,” Fantroy-Johnson said.

She noted the significant portion of Bainbridge Island workers who have to commute from elsewhere in Kitsap County.

“It’s a problem of how we want to look: do we want to look good or do we want to do good,” Fantroy-Johnson said. “And I get worried that we forget that we have to make the hard decisions up here.”

LIHI faces a fairly tight turnaround time to fully redesign their project in response to Tuesday’s vote, with the nonprofit aiming to receive council approval on a zoning change for this site ahead of an October 16 deadline to submit a funding request to the state’s housing trust fund.

“We appreciate leadership from City officials to find the best pathway to build as many affordable homes as possible on Bainbridge,” Jon Grant, LIHI’s Chief Strategy Officer, told The Urbanist following the vote. “LIHI will make every effort to ensure the final building design reflects community input, as we know how desperately working families and seniors need a home they can afford.”

The post Bainbridge Island Council Pushes to Downsize Affordable Housing Project first appeared on The Urbanist.

The City of Bainbridge Island has been working toward getting shovels in the ground on an affordable housing project in Winslow since 2022, when it identified the property at 625 Winslow Way, a vacant lot that formerly hosted the city police station. This May, the Bainbridge City Council unanimously approved a development agreement with LIHI, which is proposing to build a mix of 38 one-bedroom units, 13 two-bedroom units, 18 three-bedroom units, 19 studio units, and four live-work units.

“We must not rush into a decision that will shape the front door to our island for generations. The Corner at 625 Winslow Way belongs to the public, and its fate should be determined with care, transparency, and the broadest possible community input,” reads the Save the Corner website, created by Bainbridge resident and architect Matthew Coates. “Affordable housing is essential. But it can be met through distributed, thoughtful solutions: ADUs, smaller-scale mixed-use projects, and redevelopment across the city, rather than concentrating it all in one place.”

Opposition to the LIHI project has ramped up following the release of conceptual renderings shown at a public meeting in late May, with concerns raised around the building’s height, its overall design, and the amount of parking proposed. LIHI’s design includes one structured parking stall for every two units in the building, along with around a dozen stalls for visitors and for carshares. That’s a reduction compared to what Bainbridge Island would normally require — one stall for every single unit. LIHI said the reduced parking would save around $2 million in building costs.

Coates, who started Save the Corner, told The Urbanist he wants to see the project happen, just not at this prominent intersection where Bainbridge Island ferry traffic meets the city’s main street.

“My agenda has never, ever, ever been, and never will be, to stop the project. It’s to not build on that particular piece of land because it’s too important to our community,” Coates said. “It’s the first thing you see when you arrive, and it’s the last thing that you see when you leave. And it’s, for many reasons, more important to the greater good than it is to 90 people.”

In addition to finding a new site for LIHI’s project, Coates wants the city to return to the drawing board when it comes to the future of the 625 Winslow property. The Save the Corner site suggests some potential uses for the land, including an island visitor’s center, a public plaza and park, or a cultural center.

“What should have been done, in my humble opinion, is the city should have opened up a conversation with the community at the very beginning and said, ‘What should we do on this property? What would you like to see here?” Coates said. “This is your property. It is very valuable. It is very meaningful to this community. What would you like to see here? And if the answer is a 90-unit low-income housing project, so be it. But that conversation never happened.”

Despite the unanimous council vote in May, the project is once again facing a need for city council approval. As designed now, LIHI’s plans go beyond the existing zoning and development standards for the site. Bainbridge Island’s pending Comprehensive Plan update and adjoining Winslow subarea plan are poised to set new parameters specifically for affordable housing projects, but that work is months behind schedule. So the Bainbridge Island Council has asked the city’s planning commission — which has so far held 19 separate meetings deliberating on the specifics of the new plan for Winslow — to expedite recommendations that can be approved by this fall, ahead of when LIHI plans to submit its first major permit.

Last week, the planning commission was expected to schedule a public hearing for an ordinance that would allow the project to advance ahead of the Comprehensive Plan update — and also permit any other 100% affordable building within in Winslow’s “core” or the ferry district.

But in a 3-1 vote, commissioners voted against doing so, citing many of the same issues that have been raised by project opponents, along with a reluctance to give this project special preference even if it’s far along in the process. That’s in spite of the fact that the commission had already created preliminary recommendations for new standards in the ferry district that would have permitted this project — and potentially an even larger building on the site.

Sarah Blossom, the planning commission’s chair and a candidate for an open seat on the city council in District 3, put the amount of planned parking at the top of her list of concerns. Blossom’s opponent in November, Mike Nelson, is campaigning on a platform of “keep[ing] Bainbridge Bainbridge” and opposes the plan to increase density in Winslow to pave the way for more affordable housing.

“Even if you’re near a ferry, have access to good transit — which we don’t — you still need a car. You need to get to the [Kitsap] peninsula,” Blossom said at Thursday’s meeting. “The idea that half the residents, half the units in this building, won’t have access to a car because they’re low income. I mean, when I hear from half of this island willing to give up their car, you know, maybe I’d consider it, but to me, a car is freedom.”

Coates, who has helped design other affordable housing projects elsewhere in Kitsap County, contends that the unique constraints on the site, especially when it comes to parking, make it a poor choice for housing.

“It just makes no financial sense at all to put underground parking on that site,” Coates said. “I have over 30 years of experience doing this. So, my opinion does matter more than some keyboard person who has an opinion about it. I’ve been doing these kinds of projects for a long time, and I speak with some authority on the matter about these costs, and I’m telling you, I would much rather see this project get built any other place downtown, that where the parking is not artificially weighing the construction cost down so they could actually afford to build a decent project.”

Alex Preudhomme, the only planning commissioner to recommend moving ahead with consideration of an ordinance, painted concerns around the process as overblown. “This is just a project that happened to be ahead of the curve,” Preudhomme said Thursday. “[We’re] trying to figure out how to get one of our only city-owned parcels to deliver. You know, we have very few tools that we can use to achieve affordability.”

Bainbridge Island is going to need to figure out how to deliver affordable units at a scale that it previously hasn’t had to grapple with. Out of the 1,977 housing units that Kitsap County is asking Bainbridge Island to plan for through 2044, around half will need to be available to households making less than 80% of the county median income — approximately $77,000 per year for a family of two. With other high cost cities like Mercer Island grappling with the impact of new mandates like these, a bespoke process like the one happening here for every single project on the island clearly won’t work to actually create those units.

While the planning commission’s recommendations will carry weight, it will ultimately be up to the council to decide whether the project could move forward at its current pace. At a meeting in July, councilmembers also raised concerns about parking, and the building’s design, suggesting there should be additional “step backs” above the first floor to reduce its scale. Upper-level step backs generally add building costs, with Bainbridge Island only contributing $3 million in direct funding to LIHI in addition to providing the land for a long-term ground lease. The total cost for the building is expected to be around $50 million.

“I will not be able to vote for something that is not stepped back from Winslow Way, period,” Councilmember Kirsten Hytopoulos said.

Hytopoulos suggested that the city look at reducing the number of two and three-bedroom units, which would reduce the size of the building. Two and three bedroom affordable units are typically highly coveted by local governments who are seeking to provide housing options for families. Hytopoulos also raised concerns that incomes of the new residents moving into LIHI’s building could be too low, despite a regional need for more deeply affordable housing.

With this project representing Bainbridge Island’s first major foray into subsidized housing, it’s clear that the city’s leaders are running into a conflict between Bainbridge’s perception of itself and the need to make big moves to ensure that the city maintains income diversity — and that the island’s workers can afford to actually live within city limits. Between 2000 and 2020, the share of family households with children on Bainbridge declined from 49% to 35%, as the average age of island residents increased from 43 to 50 years old.

“This is a small town, 25,000 people — we’re not Seattle,” Councilmember Joe Deets said, joining the chorus asking for step backs. “And so a Seattle design may not be — I don’t think [that] would work too well for us.”

Within the coming weeks, the council will have to decide whether to keep the project on track, or whether to punt it further down the road. And for now, there are voices in favor of pushing ahead.

“Every time affordable housing comes up on this dais, there is always someone who says, ‘I would vote for this, but…’ And then they name 100 reasons, and they all sound plausible,” Councilmember Brenda Fantroy-Johnson said. “When the bottom line is, do we want to do this or not?”

The post ‘Save the Corner’ Campaign Targets 92 Affordable Homes on Bainbridge Island first appeared on The Urbanist.

Thanks to $2.9 million in state funding that was confirmed this week, seven extra weekday round trips to and from Bremerton will be maintained through at least next August, keeping existing weekday service levels consistent through the off-season. But the Saturday service cuts represent an initial step away from supplemental runs that started in 2022 thanks to state support. Initially intended to fill gaps in WSF service in the wake of a 50% service cut in fall of 2021, the extra trips came to be depended on as an improvement over the previous service, saving a full hour for someone making a weekend round trip to or from Bremerton without a car.

The agency will continue to maintain Saturday fast ferry service to Bremerton from May through September, alongside seasonal service to Kingston and Southworth.

While the state transportation budget was finalized in late April and signed by Governor Bob Ferguson in mid-May, the near-term future state of fast ferry service remained unclear until this week. That two-year budget included a $4 million allocation that was left to WSF to divvy up between Kitsap Transit and King County. King County, which was also provided additional state funding in 2024 to expand weekday water taxi trips to Vashon Island, has already announced that it will maintain those trips through at least 2027, providing Vashon residents with quicker access to Downtown Seattle.

Kitsap Transit framed the elimination of off-season Saturday service as the natural conclusion for the supplemental service, even as state lawmakers including Representative Greg Nance (D-23rd District, Bainbridge Island) have pushed for full funding to be maintained to provide a full range of mobility options in ferry-dependent communities.

“We’re glad to see Washington State Ferries has been able to restore two-boat service on the Bremerton-Seattle route,” John Clauson, Kitsap Transit’s Executive Director, said in a release. “We’re proud of how our fast-ferry crews stepped up to support our communities during these years when WSF worked to restore full service.”

The state ferry system remains in a precarious state. Even though WSF was able to restore service to pre-pandemic levels this summer, it remains without a spare relief vessel. “With only 21 vessels and an aging fleet requiring additional maintenance, WSF does not always have a standby vessel for emergency relief. Even when one is available, unscheduled repairs can quickly consume this extra capacity, and there will be periods when WSF will lack enough vessels to operate even the ‘baseline’ level of service,” the agency wrote in a service contingency plan released this spring.

Additionally, the service plan enacted this summer also reduces the availability of crew members to fill in when there are staffing shortages, which increases the risk of cancellations due to staffing even when there are vessels available.

But the state legislature remains laser-focused on Washington State Ferries, after a brief period of relying on other options to improve mobility for Puget Sound residents. If expanded passenger ferry service is on the horizon, it will likely be thanks to local governments and transit agencies, but the ability to stand up new passenger ferry districts remains limited by the same legislature. The Mosquito Fleet Act, introduced earlier this year, would have changed that, but concerns over costs stymied its advance during a tough budget year.

For now, the slow ramp down of additional passenger ferry service seems poised to continue.

The post Bremerton Fast Ferry Faces Saturday Service Cut This Fall first appeared on The Urbanist.

The agency’s preferred option is state-owned Pier 48 right next door, where King County holds a short-term lease on a maintenance float. But two additional options are set to be carried into a full environmental analysis: a portion of Pier 46 to the south, and newly rebuilt Pier 58 further north. Kitsap Transit is accepting comments to guide the scope of that environmental analysis through August 11, with the goal of completing its review by 2027.

Without a larger terminal, Kitsap Transit can’t expand service during peak hours beyond 12 landings, limiting the potential of adding additional routes. Along with providing space for additional vessels, a new Seattle terminal is intended to improve rider amenities (Pier 50 doesn’t have its own restrooms) and expand access to electric vessel charging.

Kitsap Transit has been eyeing potential sites for a terminal for several years. The project’s full environmental review comes at a time of uncertainty for fast ferry service into Seattle, with the state legislature pivoting away from what had looked like a potential new golden age for passenger-only ferries. The state transportation budget approved this spring prioritizes the Washington State Ferries (WSF) network ahead of passenger ferries, which lawmakers viewed as a supplement during times of reduced WSF service.

The legislature also declined to advance a bill making it easier for local governments to set up fast ferry districts, though that proposal may return in a future year.

The restoration of pre-pandemic service levels on WSF, including the return of two-boat service to Bremerton and three-boat service to Vashon Island, appears to have increased the perception that supplemental passenger ferry service is less essential, despite the ability for fast ferries to reduce travel times for riders, provide additional connectivity, and reduce climate pollution. Kitsap Transit’s foot ferries are twice as fast as WSF’s larger car-laden ferries.

Last month, King County announced the extension of supplemental service between Vashon Island and Downtown Seattle through 2027, but Kitsap Transit appears likely to reduce service levels on its Bremerton route as supplemental state funding runs out. King County and Kitsap Transit are in negotiations over a $4 million allocation that will determine the near-term future of those service levels. Potentially on the chopping block is the entirety of Saturday service to Bremerton through the off-season, which many riders have come to rely on.

“Kitsap Transit will continue operating state-funded supplemental Bremerton Fast Ferry service beyond Monday, June 30,” an announcement in late June noted. “Kitsap Transit is taking this step to avoid unnecessary disruption to riders while it continues to work with Washington State Ferries (WSF) to determine the level of state funding available for extending these additional sailings. Kitsap Transit will notify the public at least 30 days before the last day of the supplemental sailings.”

Pier 46, the preferred site for a new fast ferry terminal, is owned by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and mostly sits unused and deteriorating. The state has earmarked $20 million to start demolishing the existing pier, work that would have to proceed any future use for the property, but that demolition work hasn’t started yet.

A decade ago, as part of the Waterfront Seattle project, the City of Seattle considered what a redeveloped Pier 48 could look like as additional park space that also included space for passenger ferry berths. Funded by the state’s Department of Commerce, that design work has been sitting on a shelf, and it’s not clear what exactly the City of Seattle’s vision for the space looks like right now. Recently the site has come back on the City’s radar as part of Bruce Harrell’s Downtown Activation Plan, but details on that work have been scarce.

In selecting potential sites, Pier 48 rose above the rest in its potential to accommodate Kitsap Transit’s growing fleet. “[Kitsap Transit] selected the Pier 48 property as the proposed preferred alternative because it ranks high on all five criteria and is the only one that has sufficient space to support a long-term [passenger-only ferry] terminal facility without affecting other waterfront properties,” a 2023 screening report noted.

The other two sites Kitsap Transit is looking at are longshots.

“A new terminal located at the Pier 46 North Apron is feasible but would require demolition of the existing Pier 48 and long-term use of in-water space on the Pier 48 property,” that report continued. Pier 46 is also being eyed for base expansion by the U.S. Coast Guard, a move that the Port of Seattle has pushed back on, arguing that base expansion would give up valuable cargo loading space.

Even less likely is Pier 58, which has not yet reopened as a park space as part of the Waterfront Seattle project, though work is nearly done. The newly rebuilt pier includes a new children’s playground, a refurbished fountain area with seating, and an artificial lawn. Adding berths for ferries is possible, but making way for amenities for riders would likely mean pushing out park uses. “The Pier 58 location is also feasible with respect to available space but would require coordination with the City of Seattle (City) for potential modifications of the City’s plans for their new park,” the scoping document noted.

Despite the near-term uncertainty around passenger ferry service levels, the Seattle Waterfront will continue to be a high-demand space when it comes to ferry service, and Kitsap Transit completing the full environmental would be a big step forward for future expansion.

The Kitsap Transit Board of Directors is set to hold a public hearing for the official scoping period on July 15, at 8:30am.

The post Kitsap Transit Considers Alternatives for a New Seattle Fast Ferry Terminal first appeared on The Urbanist.