A Miracle on Sixth Street – Kirkland Parkplace Gets Green Light
After almost two years and countless hours of working with City staff, community leaders, the Planning Commission, the DRB, Councilmembers, neighborhoods and local businesses, Touchstone Development was granted approval of their Private Amendment Request (PAR) to build a mixed-use office, retail, hotel complex at Kirkland Parkplace.
Very few foresaw the 7 to 0 vote by the City Council. Despite reservations expressed by some on the Council, there was broad approval of the public benefit the project would bring to the people of Kirkland. Universal praise was given for Touchstone Development’s efforts to communicate with all stakeholders and for their LEED Gold proposal for the project.
Despite Touchstone’s outreach with over twenty public meetings, many citizens remained opposed to the project. Kirkland Citizens for Responsible Development (CRD) has been the opposition group formed by Mr. Ken Davidson. Members of the CRD have expressed concerns about the project on many issues: parking, traffic, mass, zoning, and altering the character of Kirkland. Mr. Davidson, owner of the Emerald Building adjacent to Parkplace, spoke before the Council along with two other members of the CRD. The issues of spot zoning and economic loss for neighboring properties were addressed. The veiled threats of a potential lawsuit against the City were no longer merely implied if the Parkplace PAR were approved. Mr. Davidson refrained, but the two other CRD representatives openly spoke of possible impending lawsuits if the Council approved the project. Three people spoke in favor of the project, including Touchstone Vice President, A-P Hurd, who presented a video of local Kirkland residents speaking in favor of the project.
At the end of the debate, the City Council came together and voted unanimously in favor of the Touchstone Parkplace PAR. This project still holds concerns among several Councilmembers, but they are all to be congratulated for finding consensus on this project.
The 7 to 0 vote was a strong statement that the Council believes the public benefit presented by this opportunity is overwhelming despite the earnest opposition expressed by members of the CRD. Let us hope that Mr. Davidson and his group will choose to participate in improving the project as it goes forward.
The CRD has an opportunity to reshape itself, if it so desires. By working together now with those who they formerly opposed, the CRD can morph into a new agent for change. They can choose to help to shape the eight story project, and thus channel their energies in a positive way. Or they can continue opposition and fight Parkplace and the City in court. The choice is theirs to make: either become an asset to the City and help shape its future, or remain opposed to the project and become an obstacle.
It will be difficult for those who were so invested in opposing Parkplace to accept this loss. It is never easy. The question will be, “How does the CRD more forward now in a positive manner?”
The CRD is comprised of many good people who only want to improve our city. The next step they make will be an important one. My hope is that the CRD will choose to end the threats of lawsuits. Kirkland has suffered enough this year and we certainly do not need another lawsuit.
Posted by Rob Butcher on Wednesday, December 17, 2008 at 10:24 am
Filed under Development · Tagged with City Council, CRD, Development, Downtown, DRB, Parkplace, Planning Commission, Vote
Print This Article
Related Stories:
|
|
|
|
|
I don’t agree with your assessment of CRD and I think the citycouncil made a mistake on this. Kirkland is a small town and we need to stay that way without the big developer interests trying to make a profit off our backs. I know we need more money to run the city and I approve of the business tax because it is about time. I know that is why they passed this foul project. I will spend the holidays thinking about my continued involvement here. I have to give it some thought because I am tired of fighting and having Touchstone not listen to our concerns. They look like they did not compromise at all. I wish they had.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Making money off the project would include buying parkplace immediately tearing down all of parkplace, erecting 5-6 large office buildings that contain no public amenities, leasing all the buildings. ALL WITHIN CURRENT ZONING. Touchstone could get the same office revenue in a 5 level scheme.
I have to laugh at those who think that spending a year and a half attempting to pass a project of this size doesnt cost MILLIONS of dollars out of pocket. Let alone that it’s the developer who’s going to be gaining so much from the retail. FYI, retail DOES NOT PAY. OFFICE PAYS.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Magnificent news for the future of Kirkland. This would be a good time to suggest Touchstone & the DRB look into the possibility of ‘voluntarily reducing the height of the southern end of the typewriter building as an olive brance to Ken Davidson and KirklandCRD. The speakers for CRD admitted in council that this was not about traffic, not about congestion and not about losing a small town feel – they admitted (finally) that it was about preserving the views for the existing buildings. Now that fairness and common sense has taken the day it might be time to consider adding a floor to some 5 story buildings and scaling back the ‘typewriter’ building.
IF the net square footage AND office layout does not suffer, this might be a fair and equitable thing for one neighbor to do for another.
The Eastside Sun’s opposition to KirklandCRD’s efforts were based on their disingenuous, red herring arguments. Now that the truth has won out it might be time to show some magnanimity on the part of Touchstone.
But now that the Kirkland City Council has done the right thing, what the HELL am I going to whine about in the January issue????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Amazing, wow, fantastic, unexpected, and more!!!!! A solid win for those of us who actually live, work, walk and buy lemons and limes in our downtown. We can hope that Touchstone still has the financing to put this project in motion to catch the next wave of business activity.
But, the cost of all of this in wasted time and energy will reverberate through Kirkland for a long time. If the “Obstructionist 4″ think that this lets them off the responsibility hook they are sadly mistaken.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What we got: A huge white elephant that will make money for Touchstone. LOTS of traffic, especially cutting through the neighborhoods.
What we didn’t get: Enough parking. An all-weather town square meeting area, a la Crossroads, for all to enjoy. A development that fits into the size and character of Kirkland.
Bottom line: Touchstone got the bailout they were looking for without compromising a thing in return. True compromise would have come from a smaller retail/office mix that they never gave us. Jerks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jason, I will trade you the proposed Touchstone development for a new jail near my current home! Actually upon the approval of the project I immediately made an offer on a new home near Park Place. I look forward to the increase in value I will enjoy and the ability to keep my dollars in Kirkland when it is built. Your use of the term “bailout” is incorrect. I don’t see the City of Kirkland supplying the hundreds of millions to build this project. The City clearly had a choice. I believe they made the best choice for citizens like me who intend to raise our families and be here for many years to come.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My understanding is that Touchstone bought Park Place thinking Google was going to move in. I heard they were led to believe this by City Council, somebody, and they would get zoning variances because K’land needs the tax revenue. When Google built their own offices (i agree with murph below that this, too, is a white elephant in waiting) Touchstone was left with a property that would lose money unless they could build it big. Their proposal is 1 million square feet OVER what is allowed by zoning. This is going to be 2X bigger than Lincoln Square, as much square footage as South Center Mall and Redmond Town Center, with 1,600 less parking spots. It is my belief that we simply don’t have the infrastructure to support the influx of traffic this is going to bring. It took me 20+ minutes to get out of a movie @ Lincoln Square at 9pm the other night. It took me 30 minutes to go from the Bridle Trails Red Apple Market, through Houghton, back to Norkirk at 5pm the other day. It takes 20+ minutes some days in the summer to go from Carillon point to Norkirk. Do you really think we can support this level of traffic without significant negative impact to our neighborhoods?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jason, you wrote “This is going to be 2X bigger than Lincoln Square, as much square footage as South Center Mall and Redmond Town Center”
This sounds like a good thing to me. Most municipalities find a way to support business because of all the positives that a healthy business climate brings in. It sounds like you would be overjoyed if the entire Kirkland Central Business District failed!
My family will happily accept a 5 minute longer commute in exchange for having so much good brought into our community.
When I was a boy there were blackberries covering the Touchstone property.
Is that what you want to see come back?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jason. I think youre forgetting that Touchstone did NOT have to put any retail component in their project AND that the retail component in the approved project is not going to “make them money”. Touchstone could have went along with a private office development across the site under current zoning. AND. Touchstone is FAR beyond over compensating for parking. Even though the city wants a sustainable project, providing parking for ever soccer mom’s giant SUV is NOT green. A village should promote walking and biking.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The lack of a retail mandate in the zoning was a fatal mistake made by the City. I (and everybody who went to the meeting to discuss the vision for Kirkland a couple of summers ago at the Teen Center, whatever happened to those discussions?) wanted a place where people could meet and mingle, a modern town square like they have @ CrossRoads in B’vue, that would add to the small town character of K’land. While we may get some retail with this project I think the character of the city has been changed forever. Especially given all the other major office developments going up around Park Place and over @ Google.
Walking and biking are great. Are you out walking and biking in the rain and snow of winter? To sustain that level of retail they need to pull people from outside the downtown core. Are they walking and biking in the rain and snow? Are they going to load up the furniture, groceries, artwork, etc. that they’ve bought and walk it all back up the hills of Norkirk to their home? In the rain? At night? Touchstone doesn’t want to skimp on parking because they’re trying to be “Green”, they want to cut corners on their project because they’re going to sell it once it’s built and they won’t have to mange the nightmare they’ve created.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Google complex is the true “white elephant” in a Kirkland neighborhood. Imagine something like the Google complex with 3 more stories at Parkplace. I suggest CRD work with Touchstone to enhance the facility rather than continue to fight what will only be a loose/loose for both sides. The fight is over – move on in a positive direction.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree, the Google beast is ridiculous. But why couldn’t Touchstone come up with a smaller mix of retail/office that was more in line with the constraints of the site and the character of the community? They say it’s because they need a large enough complex to provide the scale necessary to support the retail space. But that was/is before all the other development that has happened in the last couple of years and will happen in the years to come. We already have a boutique hotel downtown, do we really need another? With the Altom and Orney developments, and the developments on Lake Street, Park Lane, and eventually the Antique Mall space, there is going to be a lot of new development to support retail at Park Place without building 1.5 million square feet of office space. Really, 1 million feet of office space wouldn’t be enough? 800,000 sq. ft?
I disagree that what I’m saying, and what others opposed to this development are saying, is negative. Holding developers accountable to the will of the community is paramount to maintaining the character of our city and neighborhoods. Without this all we’ll get is a fancied up Wal-Mart/Office Super Plex that will suck the life out of downtown Kirkland and cause huge traffic & parking headaches. The road to Bellevue is paved with every new Park Place, BofA, Altom, Orney, Google, Merril Gardens, that goes up. I’m saying we should scale Park Place down to fit in better with our streets & parking situation. Touchstone is saying they want to make as much money as possible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jason is right.
Lets bulldoze everything that has been erected in the last 40 years and put the navel shipyard back on the waterfront.
Then he’ll be happy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My guess is that Jason has not lived here very long. I’d say less than 10 years. In my over 50 years Kirkland has gone through a major change about every 10 years. each time a some have gotten their blood pressure up. In the end all (excepting Portsmith) have been accepted and are now a part of the landscape that the newbies all love and moved here for. Parkplace will be no different. Fact is that it takes 10 years to get anything done around this town. I suppose there was some charm to the old door plant but I am sure that Google will be a great neighbor and an important part of this community. The community will benefit and so will the redeveloped Houghton shopping center. My suggestion is to turn the rhetoric down (of course Mr. Davidson had nothing to do with the postcards and the hysteria they caused and continue to cause) and let the process work. I look forward to taking my grandkids to a truly special place.
Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jason, I don’t know if what you say is “negative” but I do have to ask for some basis in reality when you rattle off numbers in statements like “We already have a boutique hotel downtown, do we really need another? With the Altom and Orney developments, and the developments on Lake Street, Park Lane, and eventually the Antique Mall space, there is going to be a lot of new development to support retail at Park Place without building 1.5 million square feet of office space. Really, 1 million feet of office space wouldn’t be enough? 800,000 sq. ft?”
Do you have any financial, market or other data that supports your desire for a smaller development? Touchstone and there bank have done the numbers and they say they can make it work at X size. Now you say X is too big and would rather have a smaller number. Fair enough if that number isn’t just made up but it is. I dont want the bad things you say to happen to Kirkland either but I can’t agree be against park place because of fear and made up numbers. And in case you haven’t been down town in a while you should look around. It is anything but healthy and needs all the help our community can give it. Contrast that to Bellevue which is booming. There must be a middle ground and your fear that park place is too big is understandable but at some point the vice grip around the neck of downtown that no-growthers have has to give way. Let Kirkland breathe and grow.
I think some of you wish Kirkland were Duvall or Monroe or Snohomish or North Bend. Those towns aren’t as charming as they once were and nothing is. Everything is changing and we can’t stop time or population growth. The quaint train left the station years ago.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Rob, Your comments are appreciated. John, as usual, you are misinformed or listening only selectively. Kirkland Citizens for Responsible Development did try to work with Touchstone on a compromise that would have lowered the heights of some of the buildings. But they would not so much as return our call or favor us with an email. We felt strongest about the 300 foot long building along the park, so we focused on trying to make that two buildings to allow for pedestrian access and to lower the height or modulate it to not impact the other buildings in CBD 5 and avoid potential lawsuits by the building owners who will want to protect their investments.
But Touchstone is not interested in working with us on any of these, so I don’t expect to see them open their doors now.
But never say never.
I would like to point out that when Manny spoke, he specifically mentioned the need to reduce some of the buildings to less the impacts of traffic and parking and make the project a more sustainable size for Kirkland. He spoke to giving time for compromise to work.
I would also like to point out, the majority of council members had major concerns about this project. Jessica Greenway acknowledged that of the 1,500 letters and emails they received the vast majority were opposed to the project. She also expressed doubts about the traffic study and the impending problem. Tom Hodgson said the process was seriously flawed and also expressed concern about the spot zoning, damage to neighboring properties and traffic and parking issues. Mayor Lauinger also said there were concerns as did Dave Asher. Yet they voted for the project. I am baffled as to why they could not have mitigated the size even by 30,000 sq feet to avoid the potential of lawsuits from neighboring properties. The only reason I can think of is that Touchstone said it would only build the project as specified, otherwise they would build the office only. How can this not be a threat?
In the end, they voted yes, against the will of the majority and in spite of serious consequences to Kirkland.
Personally, I think it is a sad day. I think people will be amazed and horrified by how large these buildings are and the problems they bring. Yes, there will be benefits, but many of these could have been achieved with a reasonable process. I doubt very much we will see the retail we have been promised. What has succeeded in that location will continue to. There will be some additional office-oriented retail, and there will be much non-tax producing retail such as insurance agencies and banks.
I agree, the process was seriously flawed, and unfortunately it puts the outcome at risk. But I am proud of our group and the people in it. We brought light to the issues, people heard us and responded in unprecedented numbers. I think that is how a free society is supposed to work.
And while we have lost this battle, the war is far from over. I hope you are right Rob, that Touchstone will be willing to work with citizens and compromise to make the project the best it can be. But I highly doubt it. Holiday Blessings to all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wonder if Grape Choice will carry the whine maede by your sour grapes?As usual
you make veiled threats of lawsuits…
As usual you fail to mention you real agenda… As usual you skew the numbers…
I wonder if you’d accept a reduction of 30,000, 50,000 or even 100,000 square feet if the deduct was from a building on the northern section of the redevelopment. I would suspect you wouldn’t because your real complaint was to force your neighbors to maintain your views at their expense.
When I wanted to maintain my view,I had to buy air rights over the buildings in front of me – KirklandCRD decided to try and force the property owners to reduce height, split buildings or design in horrible setbacks. KirklandCRD failed in their attempt.
Now maybe they can approach their neighbors and politely ask for some trading of building of building heights to preserve the views of your employer. Personally I wouldn’t do it, but maybe Touchstone will.
Or you can sue them and lose As usual .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
John, First, by your choice of words to Cami’s post, it is quite obvious you are uncouth and poorly educated, and flat out rude. In the old days a gentleman would have broken your nose for your remarks.
Second, to Rob and everyone else reading this, what happened here plain and simple was a poker game, orchestrated by some folks, where touchstone played a big bluff. The city council lacked the courage and skills, the planning commision was hamstrung by their boss Dave Ramsey, and no one botherede to call Doug Howe’s bluff. Plain and simple, a lost hand at poker, and in no way a majority. The vote may look like one, but it wasn’t.
The issue here is accountability of those elected not to the dollars contributed to them by developers, but to the local electorate. That is what was lacking in this process. You would also be well versed to touch yourself up on the WA legal code before you pontificate vomitus on the readers. And there are other issues, for instance:
(1) When I discover that city personnel are essentially working as staff for Touchstone – copying, scanning, mailing, forwarding dissenting messages – I would say this that points to a very troubling problem – especially when taxpayers have to pay to do these services for themselves.
(2) When one discovers that Kirkland, in a massive deficit, covered the $250,000 cost for the EIS report for Touchstone – an act unheard of in any other municipality – this again points to a very troubling problem. (And the EIS, given by Geological Engineering background is a piece of garbage.)
(3) When Kirkland violates its own Web site Privacy Policy and sends emails and all comments received directly concerning PP to Touchstone without Touchstone making a FOIA request, you have a problem.
There is more than these three little examples, and they shall come out.
And finally, no one has to sue and lose. All that has to happen is bleed the beast to death slowly. Each drop of blood followed by another. The last part is clearing out a large chunk of the council, which we will do. It’s a pit bull thing, if you dig, man.
-David
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jeez David, when was the last time you had your meds adjusted?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
funny how this group is seemingly backed by the angry developer who didnt buy air rights to the surrounding properties… hA. NO youre private views are not protected.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just got done watching the rest of the goings on last night. Gee what a big surprise! The Gang of 4 voted for something positive for all the Citizens! Also not a surprise that Cami and her friends don’t like the result and are threatening a lawsuit! I believe that Ms. Greenway also can’t count correctly. The dance she and her other cohorts did was pathetic. If you really don’t want the thing and believe as she stated that nearly everyone didn’t want it then how could you vote for it? Tom Hodgson again proved he is not a lawyer (nor a college graduate according to his City bio) Even after being set straight about “spot zoning” by the City attorney he wouldn’t give up. In the end though he rolled over. Go figure? The Mayor was really conflicted but voted for approval. These guys up for election next year?
Putting the other half of the Aramburu and Eustis comedy team up there was priceless. Mr. Eustis really didn’t have a coherent argument. He knows full well that a lawsuit is not a winner. Manny is a good man who is sincere in his beliefs. What he read were not his words or thoughts. I I know him having attended meetings regarding St. Edward’s Park where he was against turning the old building into a brew pub that would help pay for park upkeep. Now he wants to stop development at Park Place? John, in the end I believe that Touchstone has everything to lose by not cooperating with the DRB. I hope that the DRB doesn’t end up recommending something that is not doable. The sky is not falling and there is again hope for Kirkland. Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Interesting outcome and not what I expected. I understand CRD must be quite disappointed, but I hope they can see clearly enough that this isn’t entirely bad. Perhaps it will give Bungie Studio a reason to consider staying. As for the will of the majority, I don’t think anyone knows what that is. People who wish to complain are the ones who speak up, so a count of letters isn’t conclusive.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The city counicl made the right decision for the future of our downtown and they should be applauded for doing so. They did so on the basis of a thorough public review process that included input from the city’s design review board, transportation, parking, and planning commissions.
No one is in a position to make claims about how the “majority” of Kirkland residents feel about this project and to do so is obviously self-serving and disingenuous. At any rate, the city council was not conducting a referendum. They were doing the job that they were elected to do which is just how our democratic system is designed to operate.
It is hard to imagine on what basis CRD or any other project opponents may file a lawsuit. There is no legal basis as far as I am aware for claims that private views be protected by the city which seems to be their main concern. Claims of spot zoning are badly misinformed as the city attorney has explained on more than one occasion. If you want to learn more about this issue I would suggest a reading of Narrowsview Preservation Association v. City of Tacoma, 84 Wn.2d 416 (1974) in which the court reviews the basic definition of spot zoning in Washington. The city also appears to have followed all of the required procedural steps for amending the comprehensive plan including full compliance with the state environmental policy act … and then some. The legislative decisions of the city council also are not subject to challenge simply because some may disagree with their reasoning.
As to the claims that Kirkland will somehow now become “just like Bellevue” … really folks … Bellevue has nearly three times the population of Kirkland and their downtown has over 25 buildings that range in height from 13 to 40 plus stories! We are a long, long way, thankfully, from that. The additional 3 stories that Touchstone has requested is a measured and incremental increase that will not come anywhere near the density we see in our neighbor to the south. So, the sky has not gotten very much closer to our beloved downtown, and it is most certainly not falling.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My wife and I had a store in Parkplace from 1992 – 1995. We had 3 retail stores in the region, including Bellevue Square and Westlake Center for 9 years. 14 years after leaving Parkplace, it still suffers from the same problems it did back in the early 90’s, including no parking and limited offerings and a bad retail mix. Jim L on the council should know all to well the problems that center faced and still does, he was there through some of the worst times. My wife drives to Bellevue to shop at the QFC because ours is the worst QFC in the region in size and offerings. The only reason we go to Parkplace is to go to the restaurants. I for one, am glad to see this pass. It may not meet everyone’s needs, but it is long past its time. We need some quality regional anchors (think Sur La Table as an example) and several national retailers (think Restoration Hardware) to provide the local merchants with a base to succeed which also needs to including “office” shoppers and local pedestrians and residents.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Amen, David. My partner also shops at other QFC stores, or other stores entirely, for that reason. Saving neaby residents from driving to Rose Hill, Totem Lake or Bellevue cuts down on traffic for everyone and is a convenience for nearby residents.
And ditto to Sherry on the Becoming Bellevue argument being a gross exaggeration. There was a post here weeks ago with a link to a list of tall building in Bellevue, and if I recall correctly, the numbers were on the order that she mentioned.
I doubt that Bungee Studios will reverse their course, but perhaps the property owner will entertain and offer from Mr. Davidson so that he can preserve more of his view.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t like the project’s setbacks, parking, and precedent for building height variances, have not liked Touchstone’s approach to working with the community (even 2 years ago before they closed on the property my impression was they weren’t interested in anyone’s vision for K-town except theirs), and always thought Touchstone was putting a gun to the head of Kirkland with Plan B. I still believe so.
That said, it’s time to move forward and make the best of this project. It will bring a lot of benefits to Kirkland as have been described by many.
It appears to me the most vociferous and litigious opposition to this project is about someone’s loss of view from their property. Similarly, the SRM-CIVIK compromise on Merrill Gardens came about “miraculously” when the 5th story scaled back far enough from Lake Street such that the views from Portsmith at that level are preserved, but now a bank on the lower lever will also be OK, as will a drive-through. I thought those were show-stoppers for ANY 5th story???
The trouble this time is the Council voted 7-0, so CRD is on their own shaky footing. Even if all 1500 letters were in opposition, that is not representative of the majority of Kirkland, and no one will ever know what the “majority” thinks unless there’s a public vote with 100% pariticipation of the ~26K voters in town. I urge CRD to extend the olive branch to Touchstone and see if they can get some private (i.e. non-judicial) compromise on retaining some of the Emerald Building’s views.
We’re going to see more people, more traffic, and more development; the Growth Management Act requires that over time, so we need to figure out how to go forward and make the best developments, and not try to relive the past.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The last thing this town needs is another lawsuit and the Council has stood up to the lawyer who threatened them if they didn’t modify Park Place to save his view. This was bold and despite my dislike for much of what they do, the council has made a good decision here and I applaud them. Powerful people cannot be allowed sway public policy for personal gain. At least not in a democracy.
The part of the story which I haven’t read here is that the owner of the Emerald Building was attempting to sway the council for his own personal benefit. That is fine and legal, but to package it as some public service was too much. Yes, lawyers are cynical and yes they are trained at being persuasive but this story was just too ridiculous to swallow. Everyone could see right through it and then when the blatant threats of lawsuits came out in desperation it was almost laughable. CRD’s credibility was diminished in my eyes by the threats. Thank God this is past us and pray that the lawyers behind the CRD will not sue Kirkland.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, we can pray the lawyers don’t sue us or we can grow a pair and sue them, out them, put ALL their actions in front of the public eye and make them pay to play.
CiViK is not an arm of govenment and neither is KirklandCRD.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brian,
I respect your ability to let go of the past and be willing to come together to help make Kirkland a better place. I share your perspective and I think this mall can be a wonderful boost for downtown.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One last comment.
These references to the Gang of Four. Guys and gals, get over it. “L” isn’t part of a dirty word any more, and four people standing up for their beliefs (and the desires of their constituents) is a *good* thing, and not one to be treated with disdain.
I would say more like the Courageous Four.
-Da vid
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
David, You seem to be a really angry person. I hope you can calm down. This isn’t life and death. Please keep that in perspective. You state many things as if they were fact. As an example: Dave Ramsay does not control the Planning Commission. According to the City website the members are appointed by the City Council. As for the EIS being paid for by the City: I remember the Council agreeing to pay because there were other properties in the same area. Multiple EIS’s would have been reduntant would not have given the Counicl the information they needed. Hope this is helpful for you. Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Davey,
you might reread Mr. Gilday’s post. NOWHERE in it is he anything other than humerously in disagreement with cami’s group. Cami was the obnoxious one. Before you threaten anyone online you should take a deep breath and think about what you are saying.
The word you used was gentleman, a contraction of the words gentle and man. I tend to think you are neither. You might be a frightened little person afraid of actually confronting a man in the real world, but you are no gentleman.
In the blogosphere we are all equal, newspaper publisher and citizen alike. I’d pick your fights more carefully. I don’t always agree with Mr Gilday’s positions, but we all have a right to our opinions. In this case KirklandCRD DID shoot themselves in the foot, thats nobody’s fault but their own.
Al makes an excellent point, the city did right by its mandate. They should be applauded.
just my 2 cents.
Marcus Wendt
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Marcus and Al,
Thanks for the support and words of encouragement. People like DSHill don’t really want to see the truth – they have their own vision and won’t be disuaded by facts. Anger and violence are just a few of the arrows in their quiver, they also try to tear down their opponents and toss everything they can against the wall to see if anything sticks.
I’m still standing.
Remember, you can’t stop people from talkking about you – you can only stop it from being true!
John
Like or Dislike:
0 
0