Currently there is a debate in the Capitol Hill community over where to site the new Henry Library. The two primary choices are keeping it where it has been for several decades, and the Keystone site which is at Broadway and Roy. Prior to attending a recent library siting public hearing, I was uncertain where it should go. Now I am convinced that it should remain exactly where it is.

Retaining the current site was clearly the consensual choice based on applause and comments during the community meeting (of Wednesday May 26) which was attended by Library Board members and the City Librarian. It is in a quiet area, a location known to the community, in an area accessible to all, and is able to accommodate the expansion. The expanded library will be twice as big as its current entity.

As one individual put it, back when planners decided on the downtown library site, they chose correctly. That was reaffirmed by the recent decision to keep it in its current site when it is redesigned. Local planners made a prudent choice when they sited the Henry Library. We should also reaffirm their wise choice by keeping it where it is.

Conversely, the Keystone site is ridden with problems, including too high of a building (it would dwarf other buildings in the area), a dangerous location (children would not be safe), an inability to own the property (the developer adamantly refuses to sell it), and having a mixed-use instead of a single facility (or a facility which has a neighborhood service center). Furthermore, the meeting in December at which the neighborhood plan suggested this site was made with no notice to the public.

"The Keystone site is like fitting a round peg into a square hole," commented one attendee at the community meeting.

The problem most discussed regarding the Keystone site is that the developer refuses to allow the library as a tenant without gaining a contract rezone of the property to 65 feet. This height would put it well out of scale with the rest of the buildings in the area and create an eyesore, not to mention blocking sunlight from the other side of the street.

The developers' argument that he needs more height to accommodate the library rings quite hollow. His efforts are a transparent attempt to blackmail the city for more space, so that he can thus have more housing units and thus more profit. On top of this, he refuses to sell the library the property at the Keystone site, so that the library has no guarantee that its lease could end at the choosing of the developer.

Mixed use is not optimal for the library. As many participants at the meeting mentioned, we need a stand-alone site. If we have a restaurant or a retail store at the Keystone site, as proposed, we take away from the library. People want to go to a library to have a space to learn and relax. They don't need to see a glaring neon sign for a business as they enter the library.

The Keystone site proposes having a massive 260-space garage. We have enough underutilized parking lots (Broadway Market, Diamond parking lot by Safeway) in that area as it is. And we don't need to encourage more traffic on the already congested arterial roads of Capitol Hill.

The consciousness of walking to the library already exists. According to one speaker, QFC did a study that showed 75% of its customers walked to the store. Furthermore, Seattle's Transportation Strategic Plan calls for getting people out of cars. We need to support that, especially when you can take a variety of buses, or bike, or walk to the library.

Lastly, how did we even get to the point of considering the Keystone site and who supports it? The Capitol Hill Neighborhood Planning group made the decision, but in a meeting which was not advertised to the public. I only found out about it because I had been working on transportation aspects of the Plan and called three City officials to track it down. The committee, without considering an alternative to the Keystone site, was convinced by business interests that they should cave in to the developers' demands.

While I have the utmost respect for the committee members, it seemed odd the decision was made so secretively. It is even odder that, on the day before last weeks library site meeting, the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Plan Implementation Committee was told they should attend the meeting to cheerlead for the Keystone site. Makes you wonder about the process that's gotten us to this point.

I am glad that the public has had that chance to publicly debate the issue. I'm also heartened by the clear response of the citizens in supporting the Henry Library's current site over the other choices.

We should keep the library where it is.