September 29, 2000

To: Neighbors on 22^nd Ave E

Fr: Scott 206 323-0389, webcancer@aol.com

Re: Zoning Meeting for Dean Falls’ property

Background: Dean Fall’s owns the property currently occupied by Deano’s Grocery, Deano’s Restaurant/Lounge, etc. Dean also owns the two lots north of the alley. The lot fronting Madison is zoned NC3-65, and the back two lots are zoned L-3. Dean would like to have the alley vacated and the two lots behind Deano’s zoned NC3-65, same as his front lot. Thus, he would have one huge for optimal development.

Definitions: L-3 can only be 35 feet high and can only sit on 50% of the lot.

NC3-40 can only be 40 feet high, but can use much more of the lot.

NC3-65 can be 65 feet high, same as above.

NC3-85 can be 85 feet high, same as above.

What was said at the meeting: Last Tuesday's meeting was to encourage neighborhood feedback towards re-zoning the back lots from L-3 to NC3-65. Dean stated by joining his properties and re-zoning them to NC3-65 was the only economically feasible way he could develop. He also said he would ask for a construction variance from DCLU for NC3-85, as he WOULD NOT develop a building "subordinate" to any other development in the vicinity. He was referring to the two parcels zoned NC3-85 at the end of our street. In his words, "If I don’t get the 65’ zoning, I’m not going to develop anything at all".

Variances are common during construction and it would be at the sole discretion of DCLU as to whether the project would be ‘up-zoned’ to 85-feet.

So far, the neighbors I have spoken with insist they would prefer NC3-40, (thus allowing the structure to transition/integrate better with the neighborhood) or NO CHANGE at all. Currently we are suggesting the City should leave the back lot L-3 until a more comprehensive plan can be reached.

I am looking for more feedback from those I haven’t spoken with. What do you think?

• Keep it L-3, no change?
• Raise it to NC3-40?
• Raise it to NC3-65?

My contact information is at the top of the page. I will summarize comments and draft a letter to DCLU this week. I hope everyone takes time to voice an opinion as no one should be left out.

The context of the meeting was somewhat more complex. The minutes of the meeting:

• Dean stated that he would require zoning of NC3-65 for the back parcel or he would not develop at all. We would all like the block toned down, but are we willing to be held hostage? Our situation is; deal with it as-is, or look at a 65 foot, possibly an 85 foot, building.
• Somehow the meeting sidetracked into a personal attack of our Miller Park Neighborhood Chairperson. There were many questions about who the Miller Park Neighborhood Association represented and whether the suggestions were from a viable cross-section of the community. It was stated that the notes reflected the voices of whoever showed up at the meetings and more diverse interests were welcome at the monthly meetings.
• A hot topic was the suggestion of poor stewardship of the current buildings and/or businesses and how Dean’s management of a larger facility would be addressed. Dean did not respond to the current state of affairs surrounding his properties. This was a good point and was not appropriately addressed.
• On a low note, someone redefined Gentrification/Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing. Thanks to the young lady who spoke up and more eloquently said; she saw a house that everyone had a chance to buy. She bought it because she needed a home, and she has taken great pride in it for 14 years. I think we all can relate to that.
• The greatest and most repetitive concern expressed was for the transition of the structure into the neighboring residences. Many Neighbors stated the NC3-65 was not an acceptable option for the back portion of Dean’s property.
• And for the Urban Dwellers; a good number spoke up in favor of dense housing. I do not think any of us are living in the city to get a country feeling. Seattle is a hodge-podge of design and landscape and density was not planned very well. Let’s not reside next to a street about to develop without having some citizen input as to how dense. This area could easily become one of the most heavily populated areas on the Hill. Voice an opinion or let it happen.

Thanks. Scott