I do have to say that when I talked to Paige Gifford, she did state that she was told it was $40 a square foot to lease in Kenmore Village. Now, I don’t know if she had talked to the City, Urban Partners, or someone else. I did try to find out on the web whether the price that was quoted was accurate. I was unable to find any information about leasing space at Kenmore Village, so I went with her quote.

As for her moving out, in her opinion it was the City of Kenmore’s doing, not the King County Library. It’s happening in Kenmore, so what’s the city doing about it?

And thanks for clarifying about the Ostrom’s situation. I was under the impression that they had bought the property, not leased it.

But this brings up a point: Small businesses in Kenmore don’t know what’s going on in Kenmore. Misinformation is rife from talking to folks who run businesses here in Kenmore. And it’s probably why we aren’t seeing a lot more new businesses in Kenmore. They see the empty shops in Kenmore Village and think, “This isn’t the place for me” and don’t consider locating here.

Ultimately it’s up to the City of Kenmore to let folks know what’s going on in Kenmore.

The last point is that Ostrom’s Drug and Gift store did NOT buy their current location, they are leasing.

The City is not responsible for property owned by the King County Library system. It is not the City of Kenmore’s, responsibility pay for relocation expenses for another governmental agencies action. The only time the City could legally consider relocation expenses is when the city is acquiring the property under state and federal regulations.

The current Kenmore Village rental rates are NOT $40.00 square foot, but range between $5.00 to $17.00 per square foot with several in the $10.00 to 11.00 per square foot range.

The Kenmore City Council, years ago, decided that big box stores did not fit in Kenmore’s long range plans and preferred small local businesses. That is written in to the Cities Comprehensive Plan, Downtown Plan and elsewhere.

There is no room to argue that a city can prohibit only future gambling activities.

I’m no lawyer, but that seems pretty clear to me.

As far as legislating morals, I think we can agree that there are some morals that should be legislated. Don’t steal, don’t punch or kick people, etc. Of course, that’s not to say we should be legislating all morals, but the difference of opinion to me seem to be about where we draw the line.

Anyway though, that’s getting off-topic. Sorry.

But I also agree with you that the city was faced with a choice of grandfathering in the existing cardroom or ban them completely. I still feel that there could have been some middle ground that the city wasn’t willing to meet halfway on with the owners of Kenmore Lanes.

What’s interesting is that I’ve heard that Kirkland is thinking about letting cardrooms set up in the Juanita Beach/Totem Lake area. So the problem just moved down the road into Kenmore’s backyard so to speak.

Given the years of inaction by the state legislature on the grandfathering issue, it seems to this observer that the council had to choose between allowing a casino free for all or banning them outright, and I think there is a logical, non-morally-charged argument to be made in favor of banning.

IMHO.

As they say, Location, Location, Location. What’s available is in my opinion not viable for a new business. The place I would have picked would have been the Schnichelbank building. It’s in a good location. But when you look at the rest of the businesses along Bothell Way, there’s nothing else comparable till you hit QQ Bistro and father west.

I hate to say it, but the Barber Shop and the Paintball shop are sitting on prime real estate for commercial development. I’d love to put a business right there where they are.

Our city council needs to think less about regulating morals and more about encouraging small businesses in Kenmore.

1) There are some incredibly long-lived, local businesses in Kenmore that deserve more attention and support from the City of Kenmore. I have a sense that they will all disappear because the city leaders in Kenmore are more concerned with looking good (getting named #1 in magazines) rather than turning us into a 21st Century city.
2) We are living in a unique transitional economic period. The City should be offering incentives for small-carbon-footprint industry to locate here. Why not attract a medical facility or high tech office space? Instead, there is talk of attracting retailers and restaurants. These businesses are not fundamental to the development of a vibrant business base. Our focus should be on developing high-pay, high-quality jobs. We have enough retailers within a short distance of Kenmore.
3) The City should be encouraging incentives for businesses and homeowners to convert to alternative energy. Residential builders should be encouraged to include solar energy (and other technologies) into its new construction (thus making our real estate more attractive). I can speak from my personal experience as a Realtor that people are not buying homes in Kenmore. We need to make Kenmore more attractive by incorporating 21st Century components into our housing.
4) The whole Kenmore Village project should be scrapped and the public should be allowed to take the lead on re-inventing Kenmore. I remember, many years ago, when the City of Seattle hired outside consultants to “re-invent” the Seattle Center. They spent huge amounts of money, received lots of lousy ideas and, ultimately, went in a different direction. Perhaps Kenmore should learn the same lesson and develop our city around local ideas with local visionaries.

Everyone I know says: “You live in Kenmore? What’s in Kenmore. I usually try my best to get through Kenmore.” Personally, I like living here, but Kenmore will lose it’s vibrancy without a clearer vision for the business community.

We’ll see if the city takes this up.

The plight of existing small businesses in Kenmore concerns me greatly, too.

I raised that issue early on at two of the public meetings and pointedly to both Developer finalists.

As a commercial property owner (elsewhere) and former commercial tenant (in Seattle) I see both sides. When negotiating leases you bargain for terms and options. Typically, a
private landlord provides allowances for tenant improvements and time increments.

Leased space parameters is all really negotiable, depending upon the economic climate, and which party needs the deal the most.

In the case of existing Kenmore Village spaces, the city as landlord has a fiduciary responsibility to Kenmore citizens to maximize rents.

However, it would seem to me that the city could/should have anticipated the need for assistance or subsidy …… but where does that effort begin, and end ….. timing, geographically, and how to qualify the beneficiaries?

Chalk it up to an inexperienced, government –process encumbered landlord.

When it comes to real estate transactions and human resource issues the government
goes to executive session. Executives are hired or elected to make the tough decisions,
and that usually happens privately, under advice of legal council.

Surely there has been successful examples elsewhere in the state we could find to guide us.

A “fair to all” option might be to auction the space, thus allowing the city the latitude to
create revenue at whatever the market would bear at that time.

Response noted at KBIN