InvestigateWest --Dateline
Ingraham Trees
Snow
Urban Forest Under Seige
Clear cutting along 123rd in Seattle
Loss Looms In Seattle's Urban Forest
Friday, November 21, 2008
Last night at Ingraham High School, the DPD held a public meeting on the Ingraham construction project. As you know Save the Trees – Seattle and others in the community are opposed to the Seattle School District cutting down 68 trees on the west side of the High School when other locations exist on the campus where the addition can be built without cutting down any large trees.
Many neighbors and others turned out to support the trees and to urge that the project be moved. There was also a very large contingent of vocal students and parents and teachers frustrated by their long standing grievance of classes being held in rundown mold infested portables for too many years. The Principal at Ingraham stated that he made a concerted effort to turn out students and parents and teachers to support the project. With his encouragement the students basically staged a pep rally for the project. This was not unexpected considering what they have had to put up with in a substandard learning environment. The meeting comments basically turned out to be a rehash of both sides positions with little new emerging.
Those of us opposed to needlessly cutting down the trees on a campus that at 28 acres is the largest in the Seattle School District, sympathized with the frustration of the students and parents and teachers that for many years have been forced to take classes in substandard portables that are in terrible shape and have mold. Teachers and students complained of getting sick. Some of the portables house special needs students but do not have running water or bathrooms.
The Seattle School District has let the situation get out of control and is now trying to make the neighbors the villains for their negligence. The Seattle School District’s approach has been to deny they have any responsibility for delaying the project and blame neighbors who love trees more than students as what is preventing the project from going forward
But Save the Trees – Seattle and the neighbors support the long overdue upgrading of the classrooms. We are not, however, the villains just because we also don’t want to needlessly destroy a unique urban forest when viable alternatives exist on the campus for building elsewhere. One location we suggested was the North lawn area which Ingraham actually picked as the site if a future addition was to be built after the current project. It is rather ironic that the Ingraham Master Plan produced as part of this project can propose building on this North lawn location in the future but it is somehow not possible to build there now and spare the grove of trees. They are serious enough about retaining the North lawn area for a future addition that in the current proposal it is the only area on campus where they do not propose planting trees.
Two wrongs do not make a right. Not upgrading or maintaining the school in a responsible way for students and teachers in the past and proposing to cut down 68 Douglas fir, Western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees to now do the upgrade is only compounding the past mistakes by avoiding responsible stewardship of both our schools and our natural urban habitat.
The Principal testified that he went around to different student groups to recruit them to come to the public meeting to support the project as is. It is very hard for any students to take on the Principal publicly and say they opposed cutting down the trees. I have spoken with both students and teachers who opposed cutting down the trees. At least one teacher was told to stop any efforts to get students to oppose cutting down the trees because that was political and not education. The teacher felt threatened and that her job was at stake.
The Principal is the authority figure at the school. Student recommendations for college frequently come from the Principal. Is it any wonder that teachers and students who oppose cutting down the trees might feel intimidated or threatened if they spoke out. I remember when I contacted Martin Floe about our arborist looking at the trees he personally told me to not talk to the students. I guess he was afraid of them hearing anything contrary to his position. So much for an open dialogue at Ingraham.
What Floe has forgotten is that he is acting in a capacity of public trustee for the school. He has tried to make us NIMBY’s which means he doesn’t even understand the term. We are not opposed to renovating the school and in fact believe it is long overdue. I am aware of no one in our group or neighbors and other tree advocates that are opposed to the renovation. We voted for the BEX bond issue. Our tax dollars are paying for the project and we have the right to express our views as much as anyone else.
Unfortunately the process set up by Martin Floe excluded the community and neighbors from the initial selection of the site and design of the project. Meetings of the School Design Team were held in secret with a few parents and teachers personally selected by Martin Floe. The public’s only chance to comment on the proposed project was earlier this year after the building site had been chosen and the design done. And we were then told we could not comment on the site anymore since that decision was already made.
At last night’s meeting as I publicly stated, I do not think anyone there opposed the decaying portables being torn down and replaced with modern classrooms. Unfortunately it was obvious that the only option given to students and others to get new classrooms is to build in the tree grove. And blame the neighbors, rather than the School District for its inadequate review and closed review process, for preventing them from getting new classrooms.
The issue at this point is a legal one, whether or not the project is in compliance with city and state SEPA laws. We are pursing the legal process afforded the public to review the project.
The meeting was part of the public process for approval of land use permits for building in the City of Seattle and is proceeding on the normal timetable, except for the delay caused by the School District withdrawing their permit application in August in an attempt to just cut the trees down. The King County Superior Court issued an injunction to stop the trees from being cut down without any review by the City of Seattle.. The City of Seattle is expected to make a decision in the next few weeks. The City does have the authority under the city’s SEPA laws to move the project to save the trees. We will let you know when that happens.
Many neighbors and others turned out to support the trees and to urge that the project be moved. There was also a very large contingent of vocal students and parents and teachers frustrated by their long standing grievance of classes being held in rundown mold infested portables for too many years. The Principal at Ingraham stated that he made a concerted effort to turn out students and parents and teachers to support the project. With his encouragement the students basically staged a pep rally for the project. This was not unexpected considering what they have had to put up with in a substandard learning environment. The meeting comments basically turned out to be a rehash of both sides positions with little new emerging.
Those of us opposed to needlessly cutting down the trees on a campus that at 28 acres is the largest in the Seattle School District, sympathized with the frustration of the students and parents and teachers that for many years have been forced to take classes in substandard portables that are in terrible shape and have mold. Teachers and students complained of getting sick. Some of the portables house special needs students but do not have running water or bathrooms.
The Seattle School District has let the situation get out of control and is now trying to make the neighbors the villains for their negligence. The Seattle School District’s approach has been to deny they have any responsibility for delaying the project and blame neighbors who love trees more than students as what is preventing the project from going forward
But Save the Trees – Seattle and the neighbors support the long overdue upgrading of the classrooms. We are not, however, the villains just because we also don’t want to needlessly destroy a unique urban forest when viable alternatives exist on the campus for building elsewhere. One location we suggested was the North lawn area which Ingraham actually picked as the site if a future addition was to be built after the current project. It is rather ironic that the Ingraham Master Plan produced as part of this project can propose building on this North lawn location in the future but it is somehow not possible to build there now and spare the grove of trees. They are serious enough about retaining the North lawn area for a future addition that in the current proposal it is the only area on campus where they do not propose planting trees.
Two wrongs do not make a right. Not upgrading or maintaining the school in a responsible way for students and teachers in the past and proposing to cut down 68 Douglas fir, Western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees to now do the upgrade is only compounding the past mistakes by avoiding responsible stewardship of both our schools and our natural urban habitat.
The Principal testified that he went around to different student groups to recruit them to come to the public meeting to support the project as is. It is very hard for any students to take on the Principal publicly and say they opposed cutting down the trees. I have spoken with both students and teachers who opposed cutting down the trees. At least one teacher was told to stop any efforts to get students to oppose cutting down the trees because that was political and not education. The teacher felt threatened and that her job was at stake.
The Principal is the authority figure at the school. Student recommendations for college frequently come from the Principal. Is it any wonder that teachers and students who oppose cutting down the trees might feel intimidated or threatened if they spoke out. I remember when I contacted Martin Floe about our arborist looking at the trees he personally told me to not talk to the students. I guess he was afraid of them hearing anything contrary to his position. So much for an open dialogue at Ingraham.
What Floe has forgotten is that he is acting in a capacity of public trustee for the school. He has tried to make us NIMBY’s which means he doesn’t even understand the term. We are not opposed to renovating the school and in fact believe it is long overdue. I am aware of no one in our group or neighbors and other tree advocates that are opposed to the renovation. We voted for the BEX bond issue. Our tax dollars are paying for the project and we have the right to express our views as much as anyone else.
Unfortunately the process set up by Martin Floe excluded the community and neighbors from the initial selection of the site and design of the project. Meetings of the School Design Team were held in secret with a few parents and teachers personally selected by Martin Floe. The public’s only chance to comment on the proposed project was earlier this year after the building site had been chosen and the design done. And we were then told we could not comment on the site anymore since that decision was already made.
At last night’s meeting as I publicly stated, I do not think anyone there opposed the decaying portables being torn down and replaced with modern classrooms. Unfortunately it was obvious that the only option given to students and others to get new classrooms is to build in the tree grove. And blame the neighbors, rather than the School District for its inadequate review and closed review process, for preventing them from getting new classrooms.
The issue at this point is a legal one, whether or not the project is in compliance with city and state SEPA laws. We are pursing the legal process afforded the public to review the project.
The meeting was part of the public process for approval of land use permits for building in the City of Seattle and is proceeding on the normal timetable, except for the delay caused by the School District withdrawing their permit application in August in an attempt to just cut the trees down. The King County Superior Court issued an injunction to stop the trees from being cut down without any review by the City of Seattle.. The City of Seattle is expected to make a decision in the next few weeks. The City does have the authority under the city’s SEPA laws to move the project to save the trees. We will let you know when that happens.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
News for the Few
The DPD Public Meeting Survivors.
A Big Warm Thank You to ALL who attended
the Department of Planning and Developments public meeting regarding the renovation and addition project at Ingraham High School.
This was to be the night to publicly discuss the Ingraham plans, to try to get answers as to why the 60-90 mature trees had to be killed to make room for an addition to Ingraham High School. A public meeting to create an open space to discuss issues. It never happened.
It was a night where the School District played the card of cards: "it is for the students". Not an unexpected move for the District to take, since it is the fall back, and often only explanation for any of the decisions it makes.
The meeting was to discuss Environmental issues that pertained to the renovation, demolition and addition at Ingraham High School. These issues could include: Tree removal, landscaping, drainage, parking, traffic, air quality, and other pertinent topics.
It became a meeting of the staff, teachers parents and students at Ingraham High School complaining about how cold the portables are, how moldy the math modular building is and how the neighbors are wasting taxpayer dollars. The battle cry of this project was : move on before we all die from the poison of mold and cold. All topics that I believe are the responsibility of the School District regarding the maintenance procedures, and the pulling of the Department of Planning and Developments permits. None of which the neighbors have or had control over.
Of course facts land on deaf ears when the propaganda ends with "it's for the students" "it is for student education". Who can resist the cries of innocent children for education, comfort and health? Who is going to figure out who the responsible party is that put the education, comfort and health in danger?
Due to the dominance of students it often sounded as a Pep Rally. "YES, YES WE NEED MATH. STUDENTS BEFORE TREES. And there was nothing the Department of Planning and Development representatives could do but allow the Rally to run its course. I applaud the DPD's patience and wise decision.
I question the way the School District has "passed the Buck " of maintenance, and bad decision's (pulling building permits) onto the Neighbors Shoulders.
I await the Department of Planning and Developments decision in regards to the placing of the Addition on the Ingraham High School Campus. Will the Trees Stay or will they Die?
The DPD Public Meeting Survivors.
A Big Warm Thank You to ALL who attended
the Department of Planning and Developments public meeting regarding the renovation and addition project at Ingraham High School.
This was to be the night to publicly discuss the Ingraham plans, to try to get answers as to why the 60-90 mature trees had to be killed to make room for an addition to Ingraham High School. A public meeting to create an open space to discuss issues. It never happened.
It was a night where the School District played the card of cards: "it is for the students". Not an unexpected move for the District to take, since it is the fall back, and often only explanation for any of the decisions it makes.
The meeting was to discuss Environmental issues that pertained to the renovation, demolition and addition at Ingraham High School. These issues could include: Tree removal, landscaping, drainage, parking, traffic, air quality, and other pertinent topics.
It became a meeting of the staff, teachers parents and students at Ingraham High School complaining about how cold the portables are, how moldy the math modular building is and how the neighbors are wasting taxpayer dollars. The battle cry of this project was : move on before we all die from the poison of mold and cold. All topics that I believe are the responsibility of the School District regarding the maintenance procedures, and the pulling of the Department of Planning and Developments permits. None of which the neighbors have or had control over.
Of course facts land on deaf ears when the propaganda ends with "it's for the students" "it is for student education". Who can resist the cries of innocent children for education, comfort and health? Who is going to figure out who the responsible party is that put the education, comfort and health in danger?
Due to the dominance of students it often sounded as a Pep Rally. "YES, YES WE NEED MATH. STUDENTS BEFORE TREES. And there was nothing the Department of Planning and Development representatives could do but allow the Rally to run its course. I applaud the DPD's patience and wise decision.
I question the way the School District has "passed the Buck " of maintenance, and bad decision's (pulling building permits) onto the Neighbors Shoulders.
I await the Department of Planning and Developments decision in regards to the placing of the Addition on the Ingraham High School Campus. Will the Trees Stay or will they Die?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
