The Issaquah Highlands proposal for a gas station (or energy station, as they are calling it) is a bad idea for all the reasons detractors have mentioned:

It contradicts the Highlands as an environmentally sensitive and pedestrian-friendly development.

Issaquah Highlands promised its residents a thriving commercial area so that they wouldn’t have to leave the hill to shop — this new proposal would allow them to gas up close to home so that they could drive the 2.5 miles to a grocery or department store in the valley — huh?

A convenience store located at the gas station is a poor substitute for a real grocery store.

A Highlands gas station will draw cars off I-90 to refuel instead of getting off at Exits 13 or 14.

The survey conducted by Port Blakely showed Highlands support, but this is a small part of the City of Issaquah, whose representatives will ultimately approve or deny the proposal.

All city residents will be affected by a potential gas station and risks to their drinking water, and their voices should be heard also.

The Metro 200 bus and Sound Transit Park and Ride were added to Issaquah Highlands to encourage public transit, not more use of personal vehicles.

Oil-water separators, double-walled tanks, corrosion-resistant piping, vapor recovery systems, sensors to monitor leaks are all very good, but aquifer safety comes down to the training and awareness of the minimum-wage-earning attendants.

LEED-certified building is a must, if the station is permitted. But can its benefits offset the constant threat to our drinking water source?

Alternative fuels are a forward-looking requirement, but when will they be available?

Sadly, these arguments avoid the primary issue: should the Highlands development agreement be amended again without benefit to the entire city?

City councilors have a fiduciary responsibility to all Issaquah residents to make sure that laws and agreements provide benefit to the entire community.

Let’s hold them to their duty as elected officials.

Barbara Shelton

Issaquah