Hugh Sisley Properties

The meeting a Calvary Christian Church on Jan 21, 2009 was attended by 80+ neighborhood residents. Jim O'Halloran opened the meeting with a synopsis of what had been covered in the past and reintroduced the developers Ed and John and the Public Relations representative and the developer's land use attorney. In addition two architects from Hewitt were on hand to help explain anticipated designs for the project should it get the go ahead from the powers that be.

The big bombshell was dropped early by Ed when he told the group that the height they were looking for was 160 feet. This would be four times the height of any current zoning until you get to the commercial area along Roosevelt Ave where there are a couple of buildings that go to 65 feet.

A map showing the proposed and future transit station with eighth and quarter mile arcs drawn to show the inclusion of the Sisley owned property was discussed. It was noted that 15^th Ave NE and NE 65^th St were minor arterials (by city designation) and that 12^th Ave NE (and probably Roosevelt Ave NE, not on the map) were major arterials. The purpose seemed to be that the audience would be convinced that the existence of 160 foot towers on the site would be logical. The map also had indicators showing angles from where the sun would rise and set on the solstices and the claim was made that the area gets a lot of light. Of course the same can be said to be true for any location at this latitude around the world. The only thing blocking  the sun in this neighborhood would be tall buildings.

The landscape architect went on to show some pretty pictures of sidewalk scenes with walkways as wide as 12 feet, and with a few shrubs and tables how nice it would be at street level.

Many questions and comments interrupted and followed the presentation:

·         What kind of business will be at ground level? Will they be retail chains and franchise food emporiums, or small boutique, locally owned ventures?  The developers noted that they were mainly interested in the renting of residential apartments. The architect noted that the spaces for commercial occupants in this type of construction were usually 1000-1500 square feet in size and leant themselves to smaller businesses.

·         Will there be any low income/affordable housing in the development? The developer has talked with many public and government entities about this type of housing. Most housing would be market rate, but there could be some low income.

·         Do you have knowledge of any 85 foot or higher developments like this in predominantly residential areas that demonstrate how this type of construction can nicely transition into single family neighborhoods?  No, this is a unique situation.

·         You've told us it is too expensive to do actual architectural drawings and models until you have the zoning determined, but you're going to have to spend that money before you have a chance of getting any community support.

·         How many of my neighbors are concerned mainly about the height of the proposed buildings? Virtually everyone raise their hands.

·         Unfortunately, the land you want to build on is not in the location where you should put the buildings you want to build. You should be four or five blocks to the west. We've looked at land along the freeway but it's too noisy and the residents would have to look at and listen to I-5. The rents would be lower.

·         Not asked, but I wondered...Most developers know if they can build X number of units on a site, the project will be successful. How many units are we talking about for the first block? How many for the whole project? I know the concept is to get people out of their cars and into mass transit. But the majority will still own cars. Where will they go? Northgate expanded and then they had to redo the access ramps and widen I-5. How will increased density impact freeway access and general vehicular traffic on the surface streets?

The general discussion ended at 9:00 but I'm sure a few stayed longer.

 A meeting at 10:00 AM on January 31^st and Calvary Christian Church will be informational and conducted in part by the Seattle Department of Development. Come by and find out more about what's going on here.

Since the landowner has veto rights on what the developers might do, if the project doesn't meet his requirements, it seems to me that it is simply the exercise of his inflated ego. The neighborhood has to be proactive to prevent what might happen if no one cared. What would he call the tower should it ever get built? Sisley's Finger to the Neighborhood Flats.

If the developers and the landowner have any interest in a development that would enhance the neighborhood as we necessarily move into an era of greater density, they should:

1.       Do us the courtesy of removing the blight. Tear down the existing vacant buildings and grade the land.

2.       Scale down the dream by incorporating existing zoning in this residential/school area.

3.       Take another look at the Roosevelt Neighborhood Plan and come back to the community with something that works with what we want rather than your weak plea that the landowner insists. The landowner has never done the community a favor. Don't expect one from us.