Council says no to plan for north Elliott Bay

In an effort to create blue-collar jobs in Seattle, the City Council has rejected a plan by the Port of Seattle to convert 57 acres of industrial land on the north shore of Elliott Bay to a large office development with some manufacturing areas.

In a letter presented to the Port on Friday, seven council members said they could not support the Port's plan because it "has the potential of seriously eroding the integrity and viability of our key industrial lands."

The Port wants to redevelop the property, which is located between Magnolia and Queen Anne and is one of the largest parcels of industrially zoned land in the city.

Under the Port's plan, the amount of industrial use would be set at 350,000 square feet — about 15 percent of the 57 acres. It would also allow developers to build up to 95 feet, and include up to 1.1 million square feet of office space and 2.2 million square feet of research space. Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels supports the Port's proposal.

But City Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck, who chairs the council's land-use committee, said the Port's plan "no longer constitutes an industrial area, it constitutes a massive office park."

"Our industrial land is threatened by extinction from rising land values, encroachment of noncompatible uses, rampant speculation," Steinbrueck said.

The letter to the Port, written by Steinbrueck, was signed by councilmembers Nick Licata, Tom Rasmussen, Richard McIver, David Della, Richard Conlin and Sally Clark. It said the council wants the Port to triple the amount of land set aside in its plan for industrial use. The Port said it would be willing to negotiate.

"We're willing to talk further with the council on what exactly the right number is," said Dave Schaefer, spokesman for the Port. The only tenant on the land right now is Trident Seafoods, with the rest of the largely undeveloped property used to store cars and school buses. He said the site needs streets, electricity and sewage, and the Port needs office developers to diffuse building costs, estimated at $41 million.

Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said, "The proposal is still good" and the mayor is willing to look at a different balance between industrial and office uses.

Councilmember Richard McIver questioned the public benefit of sacrificing industrial land for office space. "If the Port wants to act like a private entity, tell them to get off the public dollar," he said.

How to protect industrial land has become a key issue among city leaders as the real-estate market has driven up land prices. Investors have bought land in industrially zoned areas, hoping the property will eventually be rezoned for office and residential development.

The mayor is expected to propose a strategy for preserving industrial land later this month.

Council members say industrial jobs provide benefits and wages that can support a family. Labor groups are worried Seattle will eventually stop supporting these jobs and push manufacturing to Tacoma and Everett.

"If there is not an industrial zone in this town that provides family-wage middle-class jobs, it changes the texture and the nature of the city," said David Freiboth, executive secretary-treasurer for the King County Labor Council.

The Port already has a prospective tenant interested in moving to North Bay: Korry Electronics, an aerospace manufacturer that employs more than 500 in South Lake Union. Korry's lease there expires in 2011.

"We would prefer not to leave Seattle but certainly we're keeping our options open," said Peggy Keene, promotional services manager for Korry.

Sharon Pian Chan: 206-464-2958 or schan@seattletimes.com