Seattle Sun Newspaper - Vol. 8, Issue 1, January 2004

Copyright 2003 Seattle Sun. Please feel free to use the article below in your research. Be sure to cite the Seattle Sun as your source.

Seattle Sun letters to the editor

Compromise a step in right direction

Congratulations to the mayor and City Council for finally finding a good compromise so that we can go forward with redevelopment of the Northgate area. I also applaud the City Council for ensuring that the community was included in the development of the compromise plan.

I think the council was right in moving away from the old General Development Plan process to a much more collaborative approach in the planned action EIS (Environmental Impact Study). I wholeheartedly support the idea of having organizational representatives at the table in future meetings about Northgate.

Each neighborhood will have different issues and needs, as will businesses, and environmental organizations like the Thornton Creek Alliance. However, with such varied interests at the table, many with strong opinions, a professional facilitator will be critical for ensuring all voices are heard at meetings and that resolutions will be determined in a fair and equitable manner. I hope this approach can also be used for other large developments in and around Northgate.

I noted that the resolution keeps options open for the daylighting of Thornton and hope the resolution can be made clearer about retaining the existing underground detention as well. I am still concerned that if the creek is just daylighted, we won't get all the potential detention and infiltration we need to help reduce downstream flooding and erosion.

I was just out viewing whole stream banks that have been washed away in the last couple 100-year storm events. I was glad to see the resolution also speaks to water quality improvements and having Seattle Public Utilities work on this with the developers. I hope it clarifies that this can occur for the north mall as well as for the south parking lot.

I hope the City will remain open to the idea of offering incentives to developers that can get increased development on the east side of the mall timed with the development of the Fifth Avenue NE pedestrian corridor. Please also consider allowing some natural and sustainable drainage/detention approaches to count toward open space requirements as a way of encouraging Simon Property Group (Northgate Mall's owner) and other developers to distribute open spaces throughout the mall and the south parking lot. Again, if this approach could be used in other developments as well around Northgate, we could create an environment that is healthier in many ways for this community and for Thornton Creek.

CHERYL KLINKER,

Meadowbrook

Action, not just words, needed on Northgate

(Editor's note: the following are excerpts from a joint statement issued by several community groups regarding the recent compromise plan regarding Northgate that was agreed to by Mayor Greg Nickels and the City Council.)

After being handed a plan by Mayor Greg Nickels that would have sacrificed quality of life for neighbors, placed undue financial burden on the City and closed off options of daylighting Thornton Creek, the City Council, led by Richard Conlin and Peter Steinbrueck, have forged a compromise on a development agreement with Simon Property Group, owner of Northgate Mall, and gained the promise of another agreement for the south parking lot, and a series of accompanying pieces of legislation.

The action is significant in that it takes steps towards daylighting Thornton Creek. It allows the City to buy the 2.7 acres of the south parking lot for an affordable price, and guarantees plans for daylighting will be developed.

The Northgate community's ultimate goal, however, is not a package of words. It is to actually see these improvements on the ground. There is a lot of work ahead to make that happen, and that is why this announcement, while a good framework, is far from the end goal.

The General Development Plan (which was repealed by the Dec. 8 compromise agreement) is yet to be replaced by any process which can provide for community review of proposed large tract development and any needed mitigation by future developers. The improvements to meet housing goals, better traffic mitigation, environmental protection (including clean water and habitat restoration) are suggested, but left solely for the council and mayor to act on, nor not, at a later date.

The community that has been an integral part of each and every Northgate plan will certainly work to make this happen. The mayor and council who are now proposing, but not guaranteeing these improvements, must show good faith in the upcoming months, or today's (Dec. 8) perceived victory will be seen as a complete giveaway to the mall's ownership, and owners of other large tracts in the Northgate area.

This could be a significant moment for all Northgate businesses and neighbors. However, much work needs to be done. The development agreement should have adequate review by the community.

Immediate commencement of scoping for a planned action EIS (Environmental Impact Study) for the Northgate area (and) signing a development agreement that facilitates the daylighting of Thornton Creek are two concrete steps the mayor and council must take early next year to show good faith in this process.

We pledge to continue to work closely with the mayor and especially the incoming council members, to bring the community's vision to life.

We praise the current council for taking the leadership to make this happen.

THORNTON CREEK ALLIANCE,

THORNTON CREEK LEGAL DEFENSE FUND,

CITIZENS FOR A LIVEABLE NORTHGATE,

YES FOR SEATTLE

Compromise is no cause for celebration

The Northgate "compromise" is a repudiation of neighborhood planning. It must be painful especially for Richard Conlin, who sat through countless meetings over the last few years, to see his work undone in Northgate, South Lake Union, and the University District, where community compromises have been undone by heavyweight special interests.

As a member of the only General Development Plan Citizens Advisory Committee to ever convene, I'd like to contribute a few perspectives:

First, the GDP requirement was for preparation of a master plan for development of large sites in Northgate. It required a developer to present a master plan addressing structure layout, pedestrian and vehicle circulation, parking, transportation management, landscaping, open space, phasing, and drainage.

It's true that this is not required for other commercial developments; however, Northgate is the only regional mall in the city, and has some of the largest tracts of land for redevelopment. The GDP requirement was similar to the requirements for our universities, colleges, and hospitals to create Major Institution Master Plans. They ensure that large-scale impacts from multi-year developments are accommodated without major negative effects on the surrounding neighborhoods. They were also meant to ensure that large developments are consistent with neighborhood plans.

The alternative is piecemeal development and approvals with minimal oversight of how the overall development pattern affects the neighborhood.

How does that promote good planning? You can be sure that Simon Property Group (the mall's owner) has a master plan for Northgate Mall. But now it won't be evaluated for traffic impact or water detention or pedestrian access or any of the other issues that affect the public.

Second, you would think from all the cryin' that the GDP process somehow prevented redevelopment at Northgate. In fact our volunteer GDP committee made its recommendations with fairness, patience, and dispatch,

despite Simon's hostility to the whole process. It should also be recognized that the citizens' committee was advisory only; the only person who could approve or reject a GDP was the Director of the Department of Design, Construction and Land Use (now known as the Department of Planning and Development, or DPD). And in fact, he did approve Simon's GDP.

The Northgate Mall redevelopment was delayed by lawsuits, mainly regarding Thornton Creek issues.

Some of us think that if the (DPD) Director had listened to our advice more closely, the community consensus against the proposal would not have solidified, and maybe the lawsuits would not have been pursued.

But the real killer of the development was the bankruptcy of practically every motion picture theater chain, which eliminated what was to be the anchor tenant for the South Parking Lot redevelopment.

Third, it is not true that the GDP Advisory Committee, or the various neighborhood groups, are anti-growth. We simply insisted that developments conform to the Northgate Neighborhood Plan. That means they must accommodate pedestrians and transit users as well as cars, and they should contribute to a pleasant streetscape and urban environment, particularly along Fifth Avenue NE and Northgate Way. We have many local and national examples of better development than what is proposed at Northgate Mall notably, Bellevue Square Mall's expansion to the streetfront has been successful from both economic and urban design standpoints.

On the other hand, I believe Simon is anti-regulation they envision expansion oriented toward the Interstate-5 freeway, cars, and the interior corridor of their mall, and they want the maximum freedom of action to accomplish these goals.

However, their location has value because of literally billions of dollars of public infrastructure (I-5, two transit centers, road network, etc.) that supports it.

The "property rights" folks always have an attack of amnesia about the public contribution to private wealth, but public and private sectors need to cooperate to create both a high standard of living and a high quality of life.

Fourth, the mayor's deal and subsequent "compromise" is very bad public policy. It was negotiated entirely in private, and is an insult to the citizens and public officials who patiently worked through 15 years of public meetings regarding Northgate. The development agreement was not available to the public until the day of the Council's vote! And because the new development is on the I-5 side of the mall, it does nothing to contribute to the urban design goals of the neighborhood as expressed in the Northgate Neighborhood Plan.

Although there is some window dressing requiring future development on Fifth Avenue, Simon's representatives have opposed that since the beginning. I expect nothing but parking lots on Fifth Avenue for a very, very long time. (The GDP required the developer to provide information on phasing, which revealed that 5th Avenue development was the very lowest priority for Simon.)

Finally, generous predictions of job growth from Northgate Mall expansion should be taken with skepticism. The modern regional mall is an engine for exporting local money. Almost all of the stores are national chains. Not only do profits flow out of the local economy, but administrative functions like buying, marketing, advertising, accounting, human relations, etc., are carried out elsewhere. Their merchandise is overwhelmingly produced elsewhere and in the case of shoes and apparel, hardly any is even produced in the U.S.

The rent that the stores pay goes to Simon's headquarters in Indianapolis and its worldwide shareholders. Construction of new stores will be financed not by local banks but from the national level. The only dollars left in the local economy from your purchase of, say, a Gap T-shirt will be the barely-above-minimum wage of the retail clerk who rings you up; the utilities; and the salary of the janitor who

sweeps the floor at night.

Contrast that with a purchase from a neighborhood gift shop the store owner will probably be ringing you up, in a building that is locally owned and locally financed. He or she donates to local charities, and maybe even advertises here in the Seattle Sun and other neighborhood and community media.

Perhaps what you buy will have been made by a local person who will re-spend your dollars here in the community. Studies show that the economic impact of local stores is much greater than chain stores.

I don't believe Seattle's land use regulation can change the global terms of trade; but neither do I believe that we should bend over backwards to create low-wage jobs in businesses that impoverish rather than enrich our communities, or surrender to real estate interests who are hostile to our community priorities and values.

VINCE SLUPSKI,

Maple Leaf