Sammamish Town Center: Bigger is not better, nobody wants it anyway (Scroll down page for Community Center stuff)

In the Oct. 24 issue of the Sammamish Review, there is a long article about the Sammamish Town Center. A few paragraphs stood out to me.

There’s this, to set the stage:

But even as the council approved a document that lists its first goal as being “catalyze development in Town Center,” several councilmembers openly questioned whether the 2,000 residential units and up to 600,000 square feet of commercial development called for in the Town Center Plan was realistic given the changes in the economy since the plan was approved in 2008 after several years of public meetings.

Continue reading

Analyzing the Sammamish Community Center

Websites:

Common Sense Sammamish, a “No” Vote website.

YSoHigh, another “No” Vote website.

YesSammCAC, a “Yes” Vote website.

My Previous Posts:

Risks for the Community Center-YMCA deal

Why the Advisory Vote is a Bad Idea, Part 2

Why the Advisory Vote is a Bad Idea, part 1

Two Hour Long Community Forum.

Ballots arrived last week for the Nov. 6 election and one of the issues is Sammamish Proposition 1, an advisory vote on the proposed public-private partnership between Sammamish and the YMCA for a 40,000+ sf community center with aquatic features.

I’ve previously written that I think an advisory vote is a dumb idea and detailed why in two posts (see above). I still think it’s dumb, but you can’t un-ring this bell, so it’s time to get down and really analyze the issues.

I met Friday and Monday with opponents and supporters of the Proposition. I’ve read the web sites, the newspaper articles and I’ve followed the debate. I participated in one of the public meetings. When it is all said and done, here are the issues as I see them. Continue reading

Revisiting the “Notch”

Sammamish is once again interested in annexing the so-called Notch. This post, which has a link within it to another post, explains my view about the Notch.

Annexing the Notch at the current R-1 zoning doesn’t bring anything to Sammamish. Annexing the Notch as R-6, in neighboring Trossochs, doesn’t bring anything to Sammamish, either.

The Notch should be annexed as a mixed use development patterned after Juanita Village in Kirkland. See the earlier post for descriptions.

Here’s more on why a Community Center advisory vote is a bad idea

I previously posted why the idea of a non-binding advisory vote is a bad idea for the Community Center. Here are more reasons.

The non-binding advisory vote only truly “works” if the vote is affirmative. It doesn’t work for a whole host of reasons if the vote is negative.

If the voters reject the Community Center, the City won’t know why. Is it because the voters:

  • Didn’t like the cost, some $30 million?
  • Didn’t like the size–is it too big or too small?
  • Didn’t like the pool–is it too small to offer competitive swimming, or should there be one at all?
  • Don’t know what happens to the staging area for the Fourth of July fireworks, which is where the Community Center is supposed to go–where do the fireworks go when displaced by the Center?
  • Don’t like that 75% of the capital costs are being paid by the City for a facility to be operated by a private entity?
  • Don’t like the very idea of a public-private partnership?
  • Don’t know when the facility will break even? The YMCA at the July 16 meeting doesn’t have a firm projection when the facility will break even. The absence of a firm business plan is, to me, rather alarming.
  • Don’t like competing with the privately-owned Pine Lake Club and Columbia Club?

The City won’t have a clue why this might be rejected.

The voter’s pamphlet language hasn’t been made public yet but presumably this will be an up-or-down, yes-or-no vote. Will the public even have answers to their questions in order to make an informed decision? I consider this highly unlikely, so the citizens will be voting on an “idea,” not a business plan.

As I noted previously, this issue has been studied to death by the City. A Community Center has been talked about since the very first City Council (1999-2001). That’s 12 years, for Pete’s Sake. The City has plenty of information with which to make a decision. The Council should be able to make a decision.

But an advisory vote is a classic move by government to delay action and make no decision. When desiring to avoid a decision, create another committee–or go to the voters.

The election Nov. 6. No action of any kind will likely be taken until 2013–if at all, should the public reject this.

This is a a bad idea from the get-to. This is the City Council avoiding its responsibility. How disappointing.

Advisory election for Sammamish Community Center is a dumb idea

The idea of having a “non-binding advisory vote” for the Sammamish Community Center is unnecessary and a waste of time and money.

The City Staff and City Council have studied this thing to death. There have been numerous public meetings. Money and time has been spent on professional consultants. Let’s get on with the decision-making. We elect the City Council to make decisions and policy. We don’t need more stalling and needless expense.

If the Council insists on having a vote, at whatever is the cost of doing so, make it mean something by having it binding. Having a non-binding advisory vote is just silly. We already have a Park Commission whose opinions and recommendations are often ignored by City Council. Having a non-binding advisory vote means the prospect is very real that the Council will simply ignore the voters and do what it wants anyway. Save the time and money: show some political courage and backbone and get on with a decision now.