 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Contents on this page were published in the June/July, 1995 edition of the Washington Free Press.
WFP, 1463 E. Republican #178, Seattle, WA -USA, 98112. -- WAfreepress@gmail.com
Copyright © 1995 WFP Collective, Inc.
1990- In support of pedestrians, Mayor Norm Rice vetoes a city council vote to reopen Pine Street to cars.
May 1992- The Frederick & Nelson department store chain closes, leaving vacant the F&N building at 5th and Pine, the prime downtown Seattle retail space.
Late 1993- Three potential buyers for the F&N property compete for the hand of DE Corporation, owner of the building.
January 1994- Nordstrom and developer Jeffrey Rhodes are first mentioned publicly as likely partners in a deal to renovate the F&N building.
February 1994- Rhodes enters a purchase and sale agreement for the building.
April 1994- The Seattle city council votes to declare the F&N building "spot blight" in order to apply for a federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 108 loan guarantee to assist the redevelopment.
August 1994- A HUD loan of $24 million is granted to Seattle in order to help with the "blight" of the F&N building. The city is aware that it may have to take millions in additional "float loans" in order to meet HUD requirements that 70 percent of all HUD aid disbursed by a city must primarily benefit low or moderate income residents.
August 1994- Nordstrom nears agreement with the Rhodes Group, a development team headed by Jeff Rhodes, to move into the F&N building. The renovation is to take about three years, but is contingent on the opening of Pine Street to car traffic, ostensibly to create better traffic flow around the F&N building.
November 1994- Two studies released by Seattle's Engineering Department do not support the notion that opening Pine Street would improve traffic flow downtown.
December 1994- The Seattle City Council, backed by Norm Rice, votes 7-1 in favor of reopening Pine street to cars, a key demand of Nordstrom. Sole dissenter Margaret Pageler chides her fellow councilites for "allowing a single property owner to dictate an unreasonable condition." Faced with a citizen movement to keep the street open, the Council then decides to put the issue on the ballot.
December 1994- The Washington State Convention & Trade Center releases a study saying that expansion of the Center is a "key component and requirement" for the Nordstrom redevelopment deal. Nordstrom officials deny any connection.
February 1995- The Friends of Westlake Park, a group in favor of keeping Pine Street pedestrian, seeks disclosure of documents from the city regarding HUD loans and the crime statistics used to justify "urban blight" at the F&N building. When the city fails to release the documents, attorney Rick Aramburu threatens to sue. The documents are finally released shortly before the referendum on Pine Street, but few of these disclosures make it to the mainstream media.
March 1995- Days before the public vote on Pine Street, community activist Jordan Brower sends a letter to HUD calling for investigation of the redevelopment deal and the city's involvement in it.
March 1995- After raising nearly $350,000 and hiring a number of political consultants, proponents of motorizing Pine Street convince Seattle voters to agree by a 6 to 4 margin.
May 1995- The Washington State Legislature okays a bill to allow cities to directly administer Section 108 HUD aid to for-profit enterprises. The City of Seattle had lobbied for the new law.
May 1995- Nordstrom states that it expects to move to the F&N building, but that it is not yet a done deal.
|
|
|
|
|