Ingraham Trees..still growing
WOW!
IT IS NOVEMBER!!!!
October started with fire:
A pre-hearing conference, dates for a new appeal hearing,
Lining up witnesses, finding $$$, all an uproar…
SWOOSH…a ruling, a surprise ruling
The City Hearing Examiner sent the entire project back to the Department of Planning and Development…heads spun…smiles appeared, hearts beat normal.
The Seattle School District and the Department of Planning and Development had NOT allowed or provided for an OFFICIAL COMMENT PERIOD on the new proposal. The new proposal called the “west compressed version” had not been publicized on a Land Use Notice, nor was it given the standard comment period as required by CITY LAWS…
The School District and DPD tried to be sneaky, but it didn’t work!
NOW, it is NOVEMBER, and the LAND USE NOTICE (MUP board) has appeared. The Permit # is 3009549, the project appears to be the same one as was presented in August/September to the DPD and uses the same SEPA Checklist and Addendum.
Sooo, for those who are the Ingraham Trees Faithful Guardians, it is once more time to write to the DPD to express the multitude of reasons to keep the Northwest Grove.
I would argue that it is a habitat area for local wildlife, year round and migrating, I would also argue that it is a rare plant association less than 2% of the trees in the City are Conifer—and native plants attract native wildlife. It is a pocket park for the neighborhood, adding a green space in an area rapidly being overtaken by developers. These trees are a natural filtration system for air and water…saving the City $$$ when it comes to drainage costs..(cleaning water and taking stress off of the drainage system); healthcare costs (filtering pollutants from air), recreational (to turn a 3 acre parking lot into a park will cost the City over 8 Million in Northgate).
There is one more point to be made in this long journey. The Seattle School District starts with the belief, and statement that the Northwest Grove of Trees, on the Ingraham High School Campus is not Environmentally Important. The official Designation given by the School District is “Designation of Non-Significance”. The Seattle School Districts Definition and Designation is accepted by the DPD as accurate. Because of this, it MUST be emphatically emphasized that the Northwest Grove of Trees, known as the Ingraham Trees IS Environmentally Important, and should be given a “Designation of Significance”. The plant association and the wildlife it supports was recognized as important, and protected by City Code in the City Hearing Examiners ruling listed below.
The more City rules you can quote, the better….
The DPD on their website gives the following suggestions for making comments:
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Notices/Public_Comment/How_To_Comment/default.asp#Tips
Here is the permit website:http://web1.seattle.gov/DPD/permitstatus/Project.aspx?id=3009549.
Here is the Hearing Examiners Decision from the City of Seattle Remanding the project back to DPD for evaluation of the Environment: http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?s1=&s2=ingraham&s3=&S4=&Sect4=AND&l=20&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=HEAR1&Sect6=HITOFF&d=HEAR&p=1&u=/%7Epublic/HEAR1.htm&r=1&f=G
Here is the environmental checklist for the project:
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities/BEXIII/Ingraham/2nd_revision_IngrahamSEPAChecklist.pdf
Here is the addendum to the environmental checklist:
http://bex.seattleschools.org/docs/ingraham/Ingraham_SEPA_Addendum_06102009_Checklist.pdf
Here is the environmental policies and SEPA laws for Seattle:
http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?s1=25.05&s2=&S3=&Sect4=AND&l=20&Sect1=IMAGE&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=CODE1&d=CODE&p=1&u=/%7Epublic/code1.htm&r=1&Sect6=HITOFF&f=G
The Design Team Guidelines for Seattle Public Schools:
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities/DesignStandards/SchoolDesignManual.pdf
Ingraham Trees
Snow
Clear cutting along 123rd in Seattle
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Happenings
September is almost gone.
Trees are being pruned, leaves are turning color.
Summer hasn't left, but fall isn't far.
Ingraham has surfaced once more.
The School District has supplied a new "plan".
The Department of Planning and Development approved the plan.
Save the Trees-Seattle, once more appealed the decision.
An Attorney, Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann defended the trees. He questioned the Department of Planning and Developments decision to NOT have a comment period from the public on the School Districts "West compressed version".
The Hearing Examiner for the City of Seattle once more found the
Department of Planning and Development in error.
Again, the District must post signs, the Department of Planning and Development must allow a comment period from the public and then decide.
When Save the Trees- Seattle, finds out more details, they will be published here.
So stay in touch, more info will be on the way soon.
In this hot and cold saga of the District vx. Ingraham Trees.
Trees are being pruned, leaves are turning color.
Summer hasn't left, but fall isn't far.
Ingraham has surfaced once more.
The School District has supplied a new "plan".
The Department of Planning and Development approved the plan.
Save the Trees-Seattle, once more appealed the decision.
An Attorney, Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann defended the trees. He questioned the Department of Planning and Developments decision to NOT have a comment period from the public on the School Districts "West compressed version".
The Hearing Examiner for the City of Seattle once more found the
Department of Planning and Development in error.
Again, the District must post signs, the Department of Planning and Development must allow a comment period from the public and then decide.
When Save the Trees- Seattle, finds out more details, they will be published here.
So stay in touch, more info will be on the way soon.
In this hot and cold saga of the District vx. Ingraham Trees.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Fireworks in the Ingraham Trees
This past month has been long…
June has had no rest for the Save The Trees-Seattle crew.
There was an Urban Forestry Workshop (video)
There have been meetings for a Tree Commission with the City Council,
More meetings and comments for a permanent Tree Ordinance,
Town Hall gatherings with City Council Leaders and some School Board Directors,
All of this is to save the trees in Seattle.
And then there is the Seattle School District, and the Seattle School Board.
Where we travel back to the beginning…how Save The Trees-Seattle came into existence.
Yep, that good ole School Board is at it again. When Save the Trees-Seattle takes a deep breath and thinks there is light at the end of the long tunnel for Ingraham High School the School District tries to blow up the tunnel.
In May of 2009 the City of Seattle’s Hearing Examiner remanded the decision to build in the grove back to the Department of Planning and Development. With the express definition of the Northwest Grove of trees as being a rare plant association that must be saved under the Seattle City Municipal code (SMC’s).
We at Save the Trees-Seattle had a glimmer of hope. But the SMC allows for mitigation. And the Seattle School Board has asked for the mitigation of reducing the footprint into the Northwest Grove and removing 29 trees + Madrone…supposedly dead.
Save The Trees-Seattle, and other appellants went back to the keyboards, the computers, and the Seattle Municipal Codes to express to the Department of Planning and Development why the correct and most appropriate mitigation is to move the proposed addition to the North Lawn where very little damage will occur to the Environment. We await DPD's 2nd decision.
IN THE MEAN TIME:
On July 1 the School District, Save The Trees-Seattle, Urban Forest Stakeholders, neighbors, Seattle Department of Transportation Arborist, BEX Manager, DKA representative, School District arborist, and 2 Facilities (maintenance) staff, went into the Northwest Grove.
Why did we go? Because someone in the infinite wisdom of the School District decided that the way to get rid of the rare plant association was to declare it a fire hazard…and have it mowed. So the Fire Department accommodated the School Districts request and sent out the order…oddly specifying only the Northwest Grove as needing to be mowed. Nothing was said about the North Lawn which was just as tall with grass or the Ditch surrounding the Grove. An entire afternoon was spent marking and taking pictures of the rare plants in the Northwest Grove…we also found a young flicker in a nest…
And of course, being in proximity to each other…the School District reps and the Tree Advocates got into some Fireworks of their own---relatively only sparklers compared to what awaits in court.
The end results were…no mowing under the Trees, mowing around areas of native rare plants inside the 6 foot fence and leaving the 3 foot high grass surrounding the OUTSIDE of the fence NEXT TO THE ROAD not mowed. Why the Seattle Fire Department didn’t want the ditch mowed, where cigarettes, fireworks and other flammables are easily thrown from moving cars is beyond me. But the rare plants inside the 6 foot fence had to be mowed???? The Plants and Trees that are protected by a Temporary Restraining Order had to be mowed due to a fire hazard? What is with that? Makes you wonder what is really happening at City Hall.
June has had no rest for the Save The Trees-Seattle crew.
There was an Urban Forestry Workshop (video)
There have been meetings for a Tree Commission with the City Council,
More meetings and comments for a permanent Tree Ordinance,
Town Hall gatherings with City Council Leaders and some School Board Directors,
All of this is to save the trees in Seattle.
And then there is the Seattle School District, and the Seattle School Board.
Where we travel back to the beginning…how Save The Trees-Seattle came into existence.
Yep, that good ole School Board is at it again. When Save the Trees-Seattle takes a deep breath and thinks there is light at the end of the long tunnel for Ingraham High School the School District tries to blow up the tunnel.
In May of 2009 the City of Seattle’s Hearing Examiner remanded the decision to build in the grove back to the Department of Planning and Development. With the express definition of the Northwest Grove of trees as being a rare plant association that must be saved under the Seattle City Municipal code (SMC’s).
We at Save the Trees-Seattle had a glimmer of hope. But the SMC allows for mitigation. And the Seattle School Board has asked for the mitigation of reducing the footprint into the Northwest Grove and removing 29 trees + Madrone…supposedly dead.
Save The Trees-Seattle, and other appellants went back to the keyboards, the computers, and the Seattle Municipal Codes to express to the Department of Planning and Development why the correct and most appropriate mitigation is to move the proposed addition to the North Lawn where very little damage will occur to the Environment. We await DPD's 2nd decision.
IN THE MEAN TIME:
On July 1 the School District, Save The Trees-Seattle, Urban Forest Stakeholders, neighbors, Seattle Department of Transportation Arborist, BEX Manager, DKA representative, School District arborist, and 2 Facilities (maintenance) staff, went into the Northwest Grove.
Why did we go? Because someone in the infinite wisdom of the School District decided that the way to get rid of the rare plant association was to declare it a fire hazard…and have it mowed. So the Fire Department accommodated the School Districts request and sent out the order…oddly specifying only the Northwest Grove as needing to be mowed. Nothing was said about the North Lawn which was just as tall with grass or the Ditch surrounding the Grove. An entire afternoon was spent marking and taking pictures of the rare plants in the Northwest Grove…we also found a young flicker in a nest…
And of course, being in proximity to each other…the School District reps and the Tree Advocates got into some Fireworks of their own---relatively only sparklers compared to what awaits in court.
The end results were…no mowing under the Trees, mowing around areas of native rare plants inside the 6 foot fence and leaving the 3 foot high grass surrounding the OUTSIDE of the fence NEXT TO THE ROAD not mowed. Why the Seattle Fire Department didn’t want the ditch mowed, where cigarettes, fireworks and other flammables are easily thrown from moving cars is beyond me. But the rare plants inside the 6 foot fence had to be mowed???? The Plants and Trees that are protected by a Temporary Restraining Order had to be mowed due to a fire hazard? What is with that? Makes you wonder what is really happening at City Hall.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Tree Ordinance
Today is an Exciting, Amazing and Important day.
The work isn't finished, only begun.
The Seattle City Council passed an Interim Emergency Tree Ordinance. With a 8-1 vote. http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?d=CBOR&s1=116404.cbn.&Sect6=HITOFF&l=20&p=1&u=/~public/cbor2.htm&r=1&f=G
This is only a beginning, a band aid in the big picture, but it is a step.
More than what was in the Seattle Codes, and a step in the right direction.
We applaud the Council for their decision, vote and work.
We also want to make note, that the Council is willing once the dollars are available to do a TREE INVENTORY for the City. This is also very important. We understand the current economical times may put this on the back burner, but we cannot, must not allow this to be forgotten.
The TREE INVENTORY is essential to understanding and moving ahead with a full and comprehensive plan to SAVE THE TREES in the Seattle City limits.
AS FOR INGRAHAM, Will the Interim Emergency Tree Ordinance be helpful? WE don't know.
On January 22 the DPD determined it would allow the removal of 72 of the Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar and Madrone trees in the Northwest Forest. This was not a surprise to the SAVE THE TREES-Seattle group. On February 5, 2009 4 appeals were filed to change this decision. On February 26th will be a pre-hearing with the City Hearing Examiner, and on April 1, is scheduled the Hearing with the City Hearing Examiner. The April 1 hearing is open to the Public. All tree hugger's are invited. (Neighborhood groups who have dealt with parking overflow, street narrowing, and other non-tree items are invited also).
The Hearing will be held at: Office of the Hearing Examiner,
Suite 4000, 700 Fifth Avenue (Seattle Municipal Tower, 40th Floor), Seattle Washington.
If you have a few extra dollars, Save The Trees-Seattle is raising funds for legal expenses (currently the funds go to the Ingraham Trees battle). It truly is a worthy cause, and unfortunately, the court system is still the most viable and fair system for saving trees. Our past expenses, and consultations are $4000, future legal expense will range into the $20,000 mark (this is the Ingraham bill only). Any assistance is greatly appreciated.
Steve Zemke,
2131 N 132nd Street
Seattle WA 98133
The work isn't finished, only begun.
The Seattle City Council passed an Interim Emergency Tree Ordinance. With a 8-1 vote. http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?d=CBOR&s1=116404.cbn.&Sect6=HITOFF&l=20&p=1&u=/~public/cbor2.htm&r=1&f=G
This is only a beginning, a band aid in the big picture, but it is a step.
More than what was in the Seattle Codes, and a step in the right direction.
We applaud the Council for their decision, vote and work.
We also want to make note, that the Council is willing once the dollars are available to do a TREE INVENTORY for the City. This is also very important. We understand the current economical times may put this on the back burner, but we cannot, must not allow this to be forgotten.
The TREE INVENTORY is essential to understanding and moving ahead with a full and comprehensive plan to SAVE THE TREES in the Seattle City limits.
AS FOR INGRAHAM, Will the Interim Emergency Tree Ordinance be helpful? WE don't know.
On January 22 the DPD determined it would allow the removal of 72 of the Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar and Madrone trees in the Northwest Forest. This was not a surprise to the SAVE THE TREES-Seattle group. On February 5, 2009 4 appeals were filed to change this decision. On February 26th will be a pre-hearing with the City Hearing Examiner, and on April 1, is scheduled the Hearing with the City Hearing Examiner. The April 1 hearing is open to the Public. All tree hugger's are invited. (Neighborhood groups who have dealt with parking overflow, street narrowing, and other non-tree items are invited also).
The Hearing will be held at: Office of the Hearing Examiner,
Suite 4000, 700 Fifth Avenue (Seattle Municipal Tower, 40th Floor), Seattle Washington.
If you have a few extra dollars, Save The Trees-Seattle is raising funds for legal expenses (currently the funds go to the Ingraham Trees battle). It truly is a worthy cause, and unfortunately, the court system is still the most viable and fair system for saving trees. Our past expenses, and consultations are $4000, future legal expense will range into the $20,000 mark (this is the Ingraham bill only). Any assistance is greatly appreciated.
Steve Zemke,
2131 N 132nd Street
Seattle WA 98133
Sunday, January 11, 2009
The Cascade is the Student Newspaper At Ingraham High School.
After the Public Meeting, and wanting to set the record straight with the Students the following letter was received. I have decided to post it here in reply to some of the new happenings at the High School.
To the Cascade staff,
i am saddened that the staff of the Cascade has failed in realizing the Ingraham trees are NOT an issue regarding the need to replace the portables and math modular.
In fact the portables and math modular buildings have continually been placed as a "later" project in the planning of the School Board/District for years.
The portables and math modular needed replacing when the fields were built and the lights were installed, why didn't the student body find the conditions in the portables and math modular so deplorable then as to stand up and say NO we need NEW Educational facilities before we need athletic facilities?
I am saddened at the lack of respect given to neighbors who PAY the salaries of the instructors, and for the athletic field and the lights, and the science building and the library, and even Mr. Foe's salary. The Tax payers of the City pay for the grounds that the School is on.
I am also saddened at the lack of respect, and the lack of understanding as to the health of the neighbors and future students. For the neighbors, future students and the instructors health will be at stake when the trees are removed.
The answer is to move the addition elsewhere on campus AND keep the trees. It is NOT addition OR trees.
The issue with the neighbors has never been addition or trees. It has always been MOVE the ADDITION and LEAVE the TREES.
Oh, and were any of the students listening when the Department of Planning and Development person stated how many trees would be removed? 73, Were they listening when the Department of Planning and Development person said ONLY 187 trees would be planted? Perhaps your math instructor could explain how the ratio of 73 to 187 is equivalent to 1 to 3?
It is the wasting of a Natural Resource like trees that is wrong. The North Lawn has NO trees. The places where the Portables and Math modular are don't have trees, why not build there?Why weren't the library and science construction built in a manner where a second story could be added? And why is there a future plan to build on the north lawn? Why not build on the north lawn NOW and make that addition strong enough for a 2nd story later? Why are only 20 people in ONE design team considered to have the Right answer? After all the Terrorist who attacked on 9/11 had 20 people were they correct? Or Japan at Pearl harbor? It isn't the number of people that make a project correct. Or even the professionals on the project's team. Mistakes were made when the Narrow's Bridge was built the first time. As were the mistakes when the I-90 bridge was under construction. Engineers and Architects were on those projects and were absolutely sure the plan's that had been produced were correct. How long will it take for I-90 and The Narrow's Bridge to reach Capacity Or I-5 under the convention center? How long did it take for 520? All projects done by professionals who were sure they would last for decades, with no capacity problems.
The sad part about this new addition at Ingraham, this new addition that will waste a resource that can not be replaced in the lifetime of the students or the neighbors is IT WILL NOT GIVE THE SCHOOL ANY ADDITIONAL CAPACITY. It only replaces the number of classrooms it removes. What is the current problems with the School District? Where are the Capacity issues?
Does the High School need more Capacity for the future or less? Does the School need the addition or is there away to rearrange classroom space inside the building and not have the portables now? Has anyone investigated this? Not by asking biased people, but by researching documents? Demographic studies? If the Portables and Math Modular are so horrendous, then why hasn't some one reported them to the Health Department? Force the School District to bring in new ones?
What about maintenance cost? Is a full daylight basement more costly than a traditional class room? How has the School District payed for maintenance, what is their "track" record in taking care of their property? The math modular and the portables, the current landscaping and the trees? Something so simple as Who rakes the leaves from the gutters? The students or the neighbors? Who picks up the trash along the road now, students or neighbors--that will be who more than likely will rake the leaves and pay for the disposal of the leaves, just like they do the garbage.
There are so many more questions.
This is not something about trees vs an addition. It involves counting true costs: Health for students and neighbors now and in the future, drainage-are the students aware of the abandoned landfill and methane gas?, education, dollar value, future costs both environmental and maintenance. It involves where our City wants to be in the future..40% green not 18% not 14% or 8%. And by the way it way the attitude toward trees in the 60's that removed an entire forest to build Ingraham. It was that attitude that has taken our City from over 40% green down near 8%. Why would any one want to continue that type of attitude for future building? This is what the District and Architects are doing when they say, the school was designed back in the 60's to have a west addition. The 60's Environmental awareness and 2008 is quite different. Is the District saying it is OK to live in the past?
How far can the research into this topic go? I have been researching since March 2008, and every day I find more questions, more secrets and more things to be concerned about, not just for the neighbors, but also for the students and the staff of Ingraham High School. Sometimes closing our eyes and believing an authority figure is the easiest way to go, but it can also be the most dangerous and costly.
After the Public Meeting, and wanting to set the record straight with the Students the following letter was received. I have decided to post it here in reply to some of the new happenings at the High School.
To the Cascade staff,
i am saddened that the staff of the Cascade has failed in realizing the Ingraham trees are NOT an issue regarding the need to replace the portables and math modular.
In fact the portables and math modular buildings have continually been placed as a "later" project in the planning of the School Board/District for years.
The portables and math modular needed replacing when the fields were built and the lights were installed, why didn't the student body find the conditions in the portables and math modular so deplorable then as to stand up and say NO we need NEW Educational facilities before we need athletic facilities?
I am saddened at the lack of respect given to neighbors who PAY the salaries of the instructors, and for the athletic field and the lights, and the science building and the library, and even Mr. Foe's salary. The Tax payers of the City pay for the grounds that the School is on.
I am also saddened at the lack of respect, and the lack of understanding as to the health of the neighbors and future students. For the neighbors, future students and the instructors health will be at stake when the trees are removed.
The answer is to move the addition elsewhere on campus AND keep the trees. It is NOT addition OR trees.
The issue with the neighbors has never been addition or trees. It has always been MOVE the ADDITION and LEAVE the TREES.
Oh, and were any of the students listening when the Department of Planning and Development person stated how many trees would be removed? 73, Were they listening when the Department of Planning and Development person said ONLY 187 trees would be planted? Perhaps your math instructor could explain how the ratio of 73 to 187 is equivalent to 1 to 3?
It is the wasting of a Natural Resource like trees that is wrong. The North Lawn has NO trees. The places where the Portables and Math modular are don't have trees, why not build there?Why weren't the library and science construction built in a manner where a second story could be added? And why is there a future plan to build on the north lawn? Why not build on the north lawn NOW and make that addition strong enough for a 2nd story later? Why are only 20 people in ONE design team considered to have the Right answer? After all the Terrorist who attacked on 9/11 had 20 people were they correct? Or Japan at Pearl harbor? It isn't the number of people that make a project correct. Or even the professionals on the project's team. Mistakes were made when the Narrow's Bridge was built the first time. As were the mistakes when the I-90 bridge was under construction. Engineers and Architects were on those projects and were absolutely sure the plan's that had been produced were correct. How long will it take for I-90 and The Narrow's Bridge to reach Capacity Or I-5 under the convention center? How long did it take for 520? All projects done by professionals who were sure they would last for decades, with no capacity problems.
The sad part about this new addition at Ingraham, this new addition that will waste a resource that can not be replaced in the lifetime of the students or the neighbors is IT WILL NOT GIVE THE SCHOOL ANY ADDITIONAL CAPACITY. It only replaces the number of classrooms it removes. What is the current problems with the School District? Where are the Capacity issues?
Does the High School need more Capacity for the future or less? Does the School need the addition or is there away to rearrange classroom space inside the building and not have the portables now? Has anyone investigated this? Not by asking biased people, but by researching documents? Demographic studies? If the Portables and Math Modular are so horrendous, then why hasn't some one reported them to the Health Department? Force the School District to bring in new ones?
What about maintenance cost? Is a full daylight basement more costly than a traditional class room? How has the School District payed for maintenance, what is their "track" record in taking care of their property? The math modular and the portables, the current landscaping and the trees? Something so simple as Who rakes the leaves from the gutters? The students or the neighbors? Who picks up the trash along the road now, students or neighbors--that will be who more than likely will rake the leaves and pay for the disposal of the leaves, just like they do the garbage.
There are so many more questions.
This is not something about trees vs an addition. It involves counting true costs: Health for students and neighbors now and in the future, drainage-are the students aware of the abandoned landfill and methane gas?, education, dollar value, future costs both environmental and maintenance. It involves where our City wants to be in the future..40% green not 18% not 14% or 8%. And by the way it way the attitude toward trees in the 60's that removed an entire forest to build Ingraham. It was that attitude that has taken our City from over 40% green down near 8%. Why would any one want to continue that type of attitude for future building? This is what the District and Architects are doing when they say, the school was designed back in the 60's to have a west addition. The 60's Environmental awareness and 2008 is quite different. Is the District saying it is OK to live in the past?
How far can the research into this topic go? I have been researching since March 2008, and every day I find more questions, more secrets and more things to be concerned about, not just for the neighbors, but also for the students and the staff of Ingraham High School. Sometimes closing our eyes and believing an authority figure is the easiest way to go, but it can also be the most dangerous and costly.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
