I Skim The Seattle Times And Crosscut So You Don’t Have To

[ Point Wells, looking south.   Photo:  Steve Ringman / The Seattle Times ]

(Disclaimer: Seriously, I barely read more than the headline in each of the pieces discussed below.  I should be fired.)

Whenever the Seattle Times covers development you can safely bet the farm that they will frame the reporting with the OMG-development-is-evil-and-the-neighbors-are-howling-in-rage angle.  Like last week’s front page story on rooming houses, today’s front page story on a proposed waterfront development at Point Wells fits the formula perfectly, with the headline: Shoreline neighbors say Point Wells ‘urban center’ proposal tramples their beach-side turf.  In a sane City, the headline would focus on what an amazing development opportunity that site represents.

Over at Crosscut today, some dude apparently has some fear to monger about scary scary backyard cottages.  I would rather work on my income taxes than read it.  It pains me just to link to it, all the more so because it was written by the same virtuoso who previously penned the “stinking pile of doo doo” reluctantly critiqued here.

And just to prove that I’m not biased, I also didn’t read Mike O’Brien’s Crosscut piece on what’s wrong with the deep-bore tunnel even though I got about 72 facebook updates telling me I should.  No lie!

If anyone out there has more patience for this stuff than I do, please let me know what I missed.