Where is eastside seattle

Redmond is known as the bicycle capital of the Northwest. Cycling enthusiasts visit this city to try out bicycle paths, trails, and on-street bicycle lanes. Most Redmond residents use biking as the primary mode of transportation. Redmond also houses multiple competitive cycling events annually. Click here to see homes for sale in Redmond WA. Thus, residents can assure a high quality of life in this city. Sammamish is home to miles of trailers, majestic spaces, and thousands of acres of nature parks.

Sammamish is a perfectly picturesque place to raise a family. Sammamish is quickly growing like the other cities in the Eastside of Seattle. With that, its real estate market is booming. Click here to see homes for sale in Sammamish WA. Like other cities on the Eastside of Seattle, Issaquah also takes pride in the high quality of life it offers. Issaquah possesses a gorgeous natural environment where residents can enjoy outdoor activities such as fishing, skiing, boating, and hiking.

This city provides a beautiful backdrop for a great life that most homeowners dream of. Issaquah has a small friendly community but is continuously growing. People from all over are hearing about Issaquah, and so the real estate market of this city is also expanding.

It is very convenient to live in this city because it is only 20 minutes from downtown Seattle making it easier for residents not to experience the hassle of commute. Click here to see homes for sale in Issaquah WA. Mercer Island is a green jewel sitting on Lake Washington, one of the busiest lakes in the country. Due to its prime location, it is one of the most coveted places to live in the Eastside of Seattle and is also a top vacation destination for visitors all over the globe.

Mercer Island has a variety of amenities within the city. It also gives residents access to two big cities on either side of the island, being in close proximity to Bellevue and Seattle.

Living in Mercer Island can be quite expensive, but that entails a very high quality of life. Mercer Island can give its residents the luxury of island living while enjoying the benefits of living in the city. Residential communities in Mercer Island are quiet, pleasant, and safe suburbs.

The island is served by its police force, making it a safe city to live in. For that reason, families prefer raising their children here. Mercer Island has a variety of festivals that attract both visitors and locals. These festivals bring life to the city and its economy. One of these celebrations is the Summer Festival, which occurs on the weekend before the 4th of July.

Click here to see homes for sale in Mercer Island WA. But wealth takes the pressure off. Instead of fighting, we continue to look to our success, so we can attract more opportunity, more business growth. But the trajectory holds. The immigrants of a century and more ago often took decades, even generations, to move from urban tenements and ethnic ghettoes to bungalows in the streetcar suburbs. Crowded services at the Bellevue Mosque spill into the parking lot.

Photo by Stuart Isett. Microsoft has been a powerful accelerator on that route. Meanwhile, Microsoft sought green cards, which, unlike visas, grant permanent residency, for more than 13,—7, in and That influx also has contributed to some remarkable demographic shifts.

Many immigrants to those latter two cities and to Kent, the largest municipality in South King County come from different countries than Eastside immigrants, and under very different circumstances. Relatively inexpensive housing has made them prime resettlement sites for refugees from such countries as Myanmar, Somalia, Bhutan and Burundi who, in past decades, would have settled in South Seattle.

They tend to land with a leg up on the mobility ladder, bringing more education and, in many cases, capital to start businesses. Not to mention job offers from Microsoft. Those who have the income head east. It gives them a Hong Kong feeling. Just 3. That diversity is both visible and audible at Crossroads.

You hear diners at nearby tables speaking the languages that go with them. Crossroads has its own library branch; at its center are racks of ESL English as a second language materials, naturalization guides in Khmer, Tigrina and many other tongues, and CDs by the likes of Seun Anikulapo Kuti and the Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster soundtrack, with not a Justin Bieber disc in sight.

In this new suburban melting pot, city officials and volunteers tirelessly promote the cause of embracing diversity with no fear of sappy-sounding slogans , opening doors and helping the new ethnic communities connect with each other.

The need is growing. They fill the anonymous gray and beige apartment complexes of the Crossroads, Factoria and Lake Hills neighborhoods. And they face the same economic and linguistic challenges as their counterparts in SeaTac and Kent.

Linguistic isolation is an even bigger challenge. The local Sinhalese community is too small to support its own Buddhist temple, so Thushara Wijeratna and his family occasionally attend a temple with many Cambodian congregants.

Here are five takeaways from the vote Amendments to the King County charter appeared headed toward easy passage Tuesday. Lambert's more than two decades in elected office could come to an end after she became embroiled in a controversy over a mailer deemed racist Dow Constantine holds a significant advantage over state Sen.

Joe Nguyen, the first significant competition Constantine has faced for the county's top job since he But that requires a bit more work — something I may attempt in a bit. But my guess it appears that once again, not only is Seattle adding more people than any other city, but increasing density faster than everyone although Redmond may have passed it.

OK, my apologies. I just realized there are two ways to interpret the headline. One is that the East Side is growing faster, the other is that the East Side is growing faster than Seattle. The former is definitely true, while the latter, from what I can tell from the graph — is not.

It looks like they are both growing about the same adding about 10, people per year. Growth compared to physical size is important — that is what I label increased density.

For example, Seattle grew by about 2 people per square mile since But growth rate relative to existing population is meaningless. Percentage increases simply require additional math to get the absolute increase. Absolute growth number of people added — as well as physical land mass — are the only two things that matter.

Existing density matters as well. But my point is percentage growth is meaningless without context i. Growth rate relative to existing population is not meaningless, existing population provides the context of capacity growth.

OK, meaningless is harsh — but it leads to very little insight. The capacity for growth is independent of the existing population. If anything, you are more likely to have growth where populations are low, not high. That is the trend throughout the country. If you have to qualify percentages with absolute number, then why bother with percentages?

Just list the existing population and the growth. The point is, if you are going to list one number, then it should be absolute growth. At best, percentage growth is a proxy for physical size. It is much easier to just list the physical size, along with the amount of growth. Nor it is even close. Seattle is the fastest growing city. Even if several of the suburban cities combined so that they had more physical space than Seattle, their population growth would be much lower.

It just started with a lot fewer. One way in which percentage growth is meaningful is in determining the impact on the available infrastructure. I could imagine situations in which growth of some small town for example Marysville is high enough that the impact on their infrastructure is significant, even though in absolute numbers it is tiny compared to say growth in Seattle. This is likely not as big an issue for transit the ostensible topic of this blog , but even there, I could imagine it being so.

From to now, it grew about the same. That suggests the impacts are similar. In the 70s, Marysville added people. This decade, they added 10, In every way, this impacted the environment more. Lots more land converted from farms to housing. Lots more roads, and other infrastructure. Lots more concerns about water runoff, or sewage. You are trying to tease out the nature of the growth, but that is very difficult. At a minimum, you would want to look at growth per area i.

Basically a before and after view of an area. Seattle started out reasonably dense and got denser. Marysville started out with low density and got denser. Therefore, Seattle probably added more apartments, and Marysville probably just sprawled some more. Even then it is challenging — it is very difficult to determine the nature of growth, just by looking at a set of numbers for a large area.

You would need to look at things track by track. For example, Redmond grew largely by adding new apartments not by sprawl. Yet as a city, it is still low density which means you could guess the opposite. Then there are also examples of cities that shrink, then grow again. Yet it basically just went back to the same population it had in That new growth had very little impact on the infrastructure or the environment — unlike Marysville. A place like Bremerton, for example, could probably double in size and it would have far less impact on the environment than if Marysville continues to sprawl.

That is because Bremerton would likely convert industrial land to apartments like Brooklyn did and not just convert farms to subdivisions. Then there are unincorporated areas. I find this baffling. This is common when it comes to growth. First on the list, Buckeye City, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix. The population — like many on this list — is between 50, and , That is because nothing increases the percentage growth like greenfield development.

Of course not. You have at most a few farming families — then you have hundreds of houses. This is important. I want to know how much sprawl is going on as well. The problem is, percentages are practically useless in that regard. On the other hand, looking at density before and after — even for large swaths — would at least give a clue as to what is going on.

Alright, some quick math about added density. The East Side suburbs have a lot more land than Seattle. Since both areas added about the same number of people, Seattle continued its streak of adding density faster than the East Side. Seattle also started out with more density. When it comes to transit, population density is very important, and the relationship is not linear, it is exponential.

If a thousand people move into an acre that already has a thousand people, that is good for transit. But it is even better is they move into an area with two thousand people. Thus from a transit perspective things are going well, as the area that has the largest density — Seattle — saw the biggest increase in density. This occurred even last year, a year that was by no means the best for Seattle. From what I can gather, of the various cities, Redmond added the most density last year.

Seattle added about three times as many people, but Seattle is five times as big. Kirkland was second, although it just barely beats out Seattle. So last year, Seattle was not the leader — Redmond was — but it came in third. In general, this is also likely good for transit, as those cities unlike, say, Sammamish had some density to begin with. Since , Seattle has added the most density. About , have moved into the city. Redmond likely second added 18, Bellevue added 26, Seattle is bigger than those cities, but not that much bigger.

Note: Kirkland is a bit confusing since they annexed some areas but otherwise it would lag Redmond. But these are all broad brushes. The East Side is not growing uniformly, nor is Seattle. Faster in absolute terms?