@ Fauntleroy Community Association: All about the followups

| Fauntleroy | Transportation | West Seattle news

Traffic trouble and green spaces top the toplines from this month’s Fauntleroy Community Association meeting.

(WSB photo from March)
GREEN SPACES: The push to keep the surplus substations (including Brace Point, above) and some other city-owned properties as open, green spaces continues. From what’s now the Seattle Green Spaces Coalition, FCA’s Marty Westerman said he and SGSC’s Mary Fleck will be outside Fauntleroy’s The Original Bakery on Sunday morning at 10 am for at least an hour to gather petition signatures, urging the city not to sell off these pieces of public land.

WALKING TOUR FOLLOWUP: Westerman is also point person with the city on followup from the walking tour around Fauntleroy back in January with FCA, Councilmember Tom Rasmussen, and SDOT reps.

(WSB photo from January walking tour)
He’s working to clarify what action actually is feasible – during the tour, they got lots of positive feedback from SDOT, he says, but now they’re being warned about “cost factors.”

Speaking of followups, some of the ongoing issues:

MOTORCYCLE NOISE: FCA president Mike Dey has been talking to police and the City Attorney’s Office about the ongoing concern with the daily exodus of loud motorcycles from the ferries. He’s been told the city is currently working on an overhaul of the noise ordinance in general because current laws are so wide-ranging, enforcement is difficult at best.

FERRY DOCK TRAFFIC: Money to restore traffic-directing help at the dock is in the State House version of the budget, FCA’s Gary Dawson said, but the State Senate version is still in play, so they don’t know how this is going to turn out.

Fauntleroy Community Association business meetings are held on second Tuesdays most months, 7 pm at Fauntleroy Schoolhouse. Inbetween, watch fauntleroy.net for updates.

Homeless in Seattle April 17, 2015 (9:21 am)

Although I can certainly appreciate the doggedness of this small group of media savvy tree lovers,
I feel the overarching need for Seattle is housing for the homeless and affordable living for working class.
–
I have attended their meetings which usually comprise five or six core activists. They have no ear for utilizing any of these properties for housing or other highly needed services.
–
They portray these parcels as ‘urban forests’ which in some cases (the parcel on 9th Ave SW) are nothing but a dirt parking lot devoid of trees or vegetation.
–
The parcel at 16 Ave SW and Holden has developed overwhelming community desire for something other than a park to hide crime.
–
Additionally, the Mayor’s committee on housing has just recommended utilizing surplus city properties for much needed low income housing.
–
The green spacers argue that once properties get developed they are lost forever. This is proven false by the example house in Gatewood that was donated by the owner then removed to make a park.
–
Another issue that they fail to recognize, is the huge backlog of maintenance of all Seattle Green spaces and parks. The park Department lacks funding for maintenance after decades of purchasing.
Volunteer efforts, though laudable, can not bridge the gap.
Ironically the very greenspaces we act to preserve too often become homeless encampments generating trash, dangerous contamination, health and safety concerns.
–
West Seattle has an abundance of parks and greenspaces as well as a critical low cost housing shortage that has its own impacts on the environment.
–
I believe in our civic responsibilities to those lacking housing trumps adding more vacant lots for the city to plant and maintain.

judy April 17, 2015 (3:35 pm)

Homeless in Seattle makes excellent points, hitting every one right on the head. While I understand the interest by a few to keep the substation in Fauntleroy as some sort of green space, I think it would be a luxury item with a very high pricetag over time. And consider all the volunteer enthusiasm for doing a much better thing for more at the P-patch at 35th & Barton; it is now overrun with difficulties – people defecating in the chard, lovers heating up the bench by the pizza oven – not a positive picture. I suggest community activism could better go to addressing behaviors that put this precious public space at risk rather than adding more public space that could require at least as much monitoring.

Marfaun April 18, 2015 (12:47 pm)

Appreciating “Homeless” & “Judy” comments: neither has attended any Seattle Green Spaces Coalition meeting, Seattle Parks mini-summit, or other “tree hugger” meetings where these issues were discussed before actions were taken. We invite them to come observe, if not participate.

Noting a few bad examples (like 35th & Barton P-patch) doesn’t make those the rule across WS or city-wide. Crime is a side issue – generally rare, area-specific, and monitored by neighbors & SPD. The Parks maintenance backlog is a side issue: several other options are now being employed to care for our public lands — which we’re intent on keeping in public hands. Again, one example of restoring green space – donation of a house lot – does not make that the rule. Most green space is lost for good when it’s sold to private interests. So let’s be clear: there’s no homeless vs. green space issue. Green space advocates want appropriate spaces used for low-income housing (like the 9th SW dirt lot).

The issue is development vs. green space. Green spaces provide about 2/3 of a billion dollars’ worth of benefits and savings a year to this city – in property value enhancement, public health, drainage, wastewater & energy management, recreational opportunities, etc. And none of that value is accounted for in city budgets. Rather, Seattle city councils and mayors have historically valued land only in terms of real estate appraisal. Thus, they’ve failed to create development & zoning policies that balance building out with maintaining green spaces; they’ve failed to support developing mixed income housing. They have, since Norm Rice’s administration, been addressing homeless issues, but they can do better. That homeless people seek space to sleep and rest is no surprise — they want safe, secluded spaces where they won’t get robbed or otherwise disturbed.

City officials and government policies get changed by tree hugger and other progressive activists. Perhaps people like Homeless & Judy can take comfort knowing that we’re helping create positive developments in these areas.

Homeless in Seattle April 19, 2015 (8:10 am)

Marfaun,
I don’t quite know how to respond.
–
“Green spaces provide about 2/3 of a billion dollars.”
–
What a whopper!
With such a number out of your hat, why not claim a nice round Billion Dollars?
Is there any document that provides such a figure?
Did it take into account the very real costs of green spaces.
–
How can you claim (WRONGLY) that I have never been to a meeting? You don’t know who I am and I have attended a meeting as stated.
–
All of the real issues are “side-issues” in your statement.
–
How can a giant unfunded maintenance backlog of our green spaces and parks be a side issue if contemplating adding more maintenance with additional lands?
–
I used the example of the donated Gatewood park to counter the argument that ‘concrete is forever’, as it does not have to be. My example proves it.
–
There is absolutely a ‘homeless vs. greenspace issue’.
That is exactly what we are addressing in our comments.
Additionally, there is no way that this group is in any way addressing the homeless and lack of housing in Seattle.
Remember I attended a meeting.
–
There is no comfort in knowing that this group is set out to do just one thing, acquire more land and keep people from living on it.
–
I would have no gripe if they were at the Original Bakery soliciting funds to buy these properties on their own as other conservancy groups do.
–
But it is wrong to expect our taxes to support trees over people in desperate need.

Sorry, comment time is over.