Greetings from the Maple Leaf Community Council. We have reached the end of the official public comment period on Northgate development projects and the end of trust that the City will live up to promises it makes to neighborhoods through its planning processes.

To the 37 Neighborhood Planning Groups: Be forewarned! Do not count on your (Neighborhood) Plans being implemented by new (City) administrations and staff.

The following is a description of our experiences with the City's implementation of the Northgate Area Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1993.

PROMISES MADE: ... The neighborhoods were assured that this Plan was not destined to become one of those historical types of documents that became dust collectors on City bookshelves.

No, it was touted to become the model for future neighborhood planning. Our Plan was accompanied by Ordinances that amended the Land Use Code, and Resolutions that were directives to City Departments. These resolutions and ordinances were carefully crafted to ensure that the vision of the Plan would become a reality.

PROMISES BROKEN: For the past year, the City has been reviewing the two projects that will set the stage upon which the successful implementation of the Northgate Comprehensive Plan will rise or fall...

(Editor's note: The two projects are Northgate Mall owner Simon Property Group's proposed mixed-use complex, which would be built on the vacant parking lot next to the Northgate Transit Center, just south of the Mall; and Touchstone Development's proposed retail complex, which would be built across the street from Northgate Mall, on the north side of Northgate Way.)

The Mayor's office has apparently only been interested in housing. We are disappointed at the apparent lack of understanding of the importance of, and support for the Urban Design Elements which are so essential to the success of the Plan...

The City's Strategic Planning Office (SPO) has only been interested in housing development and retail development. SPO has been promoting millions of dollars of value related to the notion of "air rights" transfer in its attempts to get Simon to do residential development.

SPO has consistently acted as developers' advocates instead of an advocate of the Plan or as steward for the neighborhoods. SPO has continued to promote proposals that are inconsistent with the Plan and miss opportunities to advance the Plan...

The (City's) Department of Design, Construction and Land Use (DDCLU) has accepted a General Development Plan from the Simon Property Group that does not comply with the Code requirements for development on the major pedestrian streets, does not meet Design Review Guidelines, and does not show that Simon's proposals will help achieve the vehicular/pedestrian balance goals of the Plan.

DDCLU passes off the deficiencies in the GDP by saying that each phase of Simon's plan will have to meet the land use requirements at the time of MUP (Master Use Permit) application. DDCLU has chosen to ignore Simon's statement (which DDCLU characterizes as "posturing") that Simon intends to apply for variances from the requirements for development along the major pedestrian streets "at the appropriate time."

DDCLU states that the City simply cannot force a property owner to develop its property. Nevertheless, the City had no problem whatsoever in "strongly encouraging" Simon to include 450 units of residential development in Phase I despite the fact that Simon is very clearly not in the business of residential development.

This fact reveals that the City is perfectly capable of promoting and getting what the Mayor wants.

Neighborhoods did not oppose the residential units, although they were not a high neighborhood priority. If moving or eliminating residential units would allow for the daylighting of Thornton Creek, then neighborhoods would undoubtedly choose to daylight Thornton Creek.

DDCLU appears ready to allow Simon to count a fenced detention pond as passive open space, a first in the City and a bad precedent in an area long noted to be deficient in open space.

Despite the difference in recommendations between the Design Review Board and the GDP Advisory Committee, DDCLU has elected to ignore the issue to the extent that it was not aware that the code requirements for permitting a skybridge (which Simon plans to build) apply citywide. DDCLU has become an advocate for development interests...

It is completely unacceptable that SPO has not fully stewarded the Plan and that DDCLU has not fully pursued its responsibility to enforce the SEPA guidelines specific to Northgate by taking the opportunity to develop as full an understanding as possible of the Plan by consulting with the two City staff members who were the Program and Project Managers for the Plan at the time the Plan was developed. No attempt was made to refresh the institutional memory ... Based on all of the above, it seems clear to us that the City has all but abandoned the Northgate Plan...

If the City has no real intention of following through on these plans, then why not invest the planning dollars in tangible public benefits, such as community centers, parks and libraries?

-ISA WERNING, JANICE CAMP, DON MACFARLANCE, FRANK LUFKIN, JOLENE ROLHISER, MICHAEL MILLER, MIKE THOMPSON, KEVIN MCKEIGUE