West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Open Discussion

(30 posts)

Where did the bench go?

Started 1 year ago by cbof
Latest reply from Zenguy

cbof
Member Profile

Does anyone know what happened to the bench that was sitting at the end of 49th, at the top of the hill with steps down to Genesee? It was such a nice "walk destination," with a lovely view. Not sure if a neighbor had owned the bench and decided to move it... If it's an option, it would be nice to have it back. Just wondering!

Posted 1 year ago #
SomeGuy
Member Profile

I heard some jackass destroyed it.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

We put the bench out there two years ago and it has been an enormous pleasure to watch people enjoying it. Unfortunately, one of our neighbors decided that it was too unstable and junked it without talking to anyone. The neighbor that took the bench to the dump doesn't want it replaced because they don't want to create a "park" here, and insisted that if it were to be replaced we do it legally. After calling the city and hearing about the expense of legitimately putting a bench out there, permits and liability insurance, we regretfully decided to let the spot be as is...and we are trying to maintain peace with our neighbor. :(

Posted 1 year ago #
cbof
Member Profile

thanks for the reply, and for encouraging communal use of such a pretty little spot. i guess we'll just have to bring a picnic blanket next time. :-)

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

could we do a sit in?
wouldn't that be a fun meet up ;->

perhaps we could even entice the neighbor out to enjoy the view.

Posted 1 year ago #
Caduceus
Member Profile

Or just find a way to make inexpensive benches; out of recycled materials maybe? And keep placing them.

See how much gas your neighbor likes to waste living up to his ideology.

Posted 1 year ago #
Genesee Hill
Member Profile

Maybe a good place to park a used fire truck from Oregon...

Posted 1 year ago #
JanS
Member Profile

while I've never seen this bench, let alone sat on it, I'm just trying to figure out when it became OK for someone to just get rid of something that's not theirs. If it was trash, I understand..but it was a bench, for goodness sake !

Posted 1 year ago #
JayDee
Member Profile

Maybe if a large square rock, 4'x 2'x 3' high was dropped there... :-)

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

To play devil's advocate for a moment...and please don't get me wrong, the bench sounds like a lovely idea. I just think there might be more to this than the obvious pleasure of having a bench with a view in a nice stopping place, and the neighbor being demonized might actually have some good reasons for his/her actions. For example, a bench can create a "meetup" place for activities other than the innocent ones described; perhaps there were kids (or others) hanging out and making noise at all hours. A bench does become a gathering place, and the neighbor might simply wish to maintain the peace and quiet of the location. Some folks are oblivious to noise, activity and loud conversation - others, not so much. It doesn't make them evil. Technically, a bench left on public property is no different than an old sofa, and doesn't fall in the protected category of private property. Again, I don't know all the details here, but that's the point. None of us here do.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

anonyme...

if the neighbor who removed the bench had wanted to make those arguments...
wouldn't they have been better made in a consensus decision that involved all of the neighbors?

"because I can" is not an argument..

it's bullying.

Posted 1 year ago #
KBear
Member Profile

Yes, JoB, but leaving a bench in a public space is littering. Maybe placing the bench in the first place should have been a consensus decision involving all the neighbors.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

We had the bench and it seemed like a nice use for it. We were working on a neighborhood cleanup of the dead end and the hillside on Genessee and thought it would be a nice addition.

While it could have become a "hangout", it has become a place where couples sit and look over the Sound and Lincoln Park and folks come to eat lunch or play guitar. The "bad elements" tend to sit on the stairs where they cannot be observed to do whatever "bad" things they are doing.

I admit we made a unilateral decision but it only improved our neighborhood. Little steps are what make the world a better place. After talking with the neighbor who took the bench to the dump, it became clear that they didn't want it there for all the reasons stated above. And, we haven't replaced it.

Fear wins again.

Kinda sad.

p.s. it's less bullying and more passive aggressive

Posted 1 year ago #
KBear
Member Profile

It's too bad. It was a nice place for a bench.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

Everything I read here points to a simple disagreement of taste between two neighbors who are both apparently intelligent, civic-minded adults. "Fear" did not win, there was no "bullying" and no "passive aggression". Framing the situation in terms such as these is irresponsible and divisive, especially when the decision to place the bench and "improve" the neighborhood was admittedly unilateral.

From a personality standpoint, extraverts might welcome impromptu guitar concerts on their doorstep, while introverts could find this distracting and intrusive. Neither is wrong. People disagree. Period. I simply see no need to vilify the guy who removed the bench; it sounds as if he did so for perfectly valid reasons, whether you agree with them or not.

If lots of people really want the bench, go through proper channels to get it back. The process, tedious though it might be, could be revealing.

Posted 1 year ago #
KBear
Member Profile

Throwing the bench away rather than talking to the person who put it there is passive-aggressive. Unless they didn't know who put it there. But they could have guessed it was one of the neighbors. So it's still passive-aggressive.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

KBear, I agree with your previous post suggesting that consensus should have been reached before the bench was placed. I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like the neighbor who placed the bench was fully aware that the other guy wanted it removed, and had made clear his intention to do so. No passive-aggression.

So - if I'm understanding this correctly - the guy who removed the bench either knew or should have known that a neighbor put it there (whether the individual in question or the neighbors collectively)and it therefore became his duty and responsibility to contact either that neighbor or all of them and get permission from them for him to remove this illegally placed bench - even though the bench had been placed with none of the same courtesy? Under this rationale, the placement itself could also be considered passive-aggressive...

On the other hand, to go on the WSB and absolutely vilify a neighbor while claiming to want to "keep the peace" is absolutely textbook passive-aggression.

Again, to be clear, I'm merely putting forth what I believe could be a defense of someone who is voiceless in this discussion. I honestly don't give a rat's ass about the bench, but I do care about fairness. Again, none of us commenting knows the whole story. For example, do we know how and when the bench remover made his views known, and how those views were received? Based on some of the responses here, I wonder.

Actually, what he/she should have done was report the bench as an illegal dumping situation and had the City remove it. Then he wouldn't be the bad guy and scapegoat of this post. And neither would I, for daring to offer an alternative view.

Posted 1 year ago #
JayDee
Member Profile

I looked on Google Earth and the presumed bench location appears to be visible to the east of the stairway. If that was the location, it would appear to be a street end, and city property.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

Wow. I love a good discussion.

So we never asked the neighbor because this person is conspicuously absent from anything that happens with our neighbors, block parties or even just being social. If they had expressed thier opinion when we put the bench out there, it wouldn't have happened. But since they weren't around when we were doing the hillside cleanup they did get left out of the decision.

Although, the entire group in attendance, some five or six households, unanimously thought it was a great idea.

I didn't find out who had removed the bench until I was talking to this person. And, to be fair, the reason for it's removal seemed sound. It's just the method that was a little shaky.

Anonyme, your reasoning is sound and I respect your opinions. I do love a exchange of opions though...in a civil way.

I do kind of like the idea of a rock appearing...

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

anonyme,

"If lots of people really want the bench, go through proper channels to get it back. The process, tedious though it might be, could be revealing. "

funding a bench isn't the problem..
a tedious process isn't the problem
assuming responsibility for liability insurance so the bench can be legal is the problem...

Posted 1 year ago #
yes2ws
Member Profile

I agree, anonyme.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

Lolo: thanks for the new info. It sounds like the bench was more of a group decision, and that you and your neighbors are a conscientious and caring group. However, I would not automatically exclude the bench remover simply because he/she is not a joiner, or a sociable, extraverted 'team player'. We have a tendency in this country to demonize introverts. To be private and keep to oneself is seen as suspect; Jung described American society as being "pathologically extraverted". It sounds as if this neighbor, having been left out of the conversation (for whatever reason) chose the least confrontational avenue remaining. There just weren't any bad guys here - including you, Lolo. I believe your intentions were the best and the bench idea was delightful. I just don't believe the black or white depiction that colors one action as good, therefore the opposite is bad.

JoB, I don't quite understand why a City installation on public property would require private insurance by a homeowner, but I can't claim any definitive knowledge on the subject. I do think it possible that the City might balk at the project for the same reasons expressed by the bench remover.

At this stage, the rock from space sounds ideal.

Posted 1 year ago #
JoB
Member Profile

anonyme

from LOLo's post #3

"After calling the city and hearing about the expense of legitimately putting a bench out there, permits and liability insurance, "

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

I know, I read it, but again - it sounds odd. Just saying.

It may be how the situation was presented to the City. Sounds like maybe Lolo asked how they could personally put in a bench? It's unclear as to whether the response was in regard to expenses that the City would incur, or the homeowner. It might be a different story if the neighborhood petitioned the City (probably Parks)to install one as a public fixture, which would undoubtedly include a public review, budgeting, etc. I don't see any way that homeowners would be on the hook for that.

I suppose a new, mini-park could be created with a name like "Genesee Outlook" or "Genesee Viewpoint", etc.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

Liability and city process. I talked to a couple of people from the city regarding this matter. Both of them told me the same thing, this is public property and you are allowed and encouraged to take care of it. "Take care of it" is limited to mowing and beauty bark. Any additional changes or additions require permits and insurance if there is any chance of liability involved. God forbid you'd pick up a sliver and want to sue the someone.

Anyway, they have legitimate concerns that people will start things that they don't intend to maintain or install substandard and hazardous fixtures on public property where people will get hurt. All in the name of public good. I get it and it makes sense.

The funny thing is that the city workers were having a hard time justifying this to me. I commented to both of them that they didn't sound happy with what they were telling me and they both agreed.

Bring a blanket next time you come.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

Yes...I was asking about a private person installing a bench. The process involved is the same one that businesses have to go through to put seating in front of their establishment on a sidewalk.

Posted 1 year ago #
anonyme
Member Profile

So - I'm wondering if you could take a different approach, requesting a public installation rather than a private one? Sometimes, even though Parks (or other City agencies/departments) are cash-strapped, they have pots of money that can ONLY be used for certain purposes. Perhaps a project such as this might qualify under some type of urban renewal program. You never know.

Posted 1 year ago #
ConcernedHedonist
Member Profile

Best. Thread. Ever. And I'm not even being sarcastic. From the proposal of a sit in for a bench (absolute gold) to anonyme's rhetorical scalpel work (although the Jung thing is a bit of a reach) to Lolo's almost David Stern-like pacing of in information distribution to the strange and omnipresent junkyard bound neighbor...this is really what it's all about. Kudos all around.

Posted 1 year ago #
Lolo
Member Profile

Well...we are back to my neighbor not wanting to create a "park."

I think that if you live in a beautiful spot you should be willing to share it but they are of the opinion that we have a nice private dead end and they want to keep it that way.

If you come this way, be nice and wave. You might change someone's opinion.

Posted 1 year ago #
Zenguy
Member Profile

I am reluctant to share my secrets, but there is a bench with a beautiful view of Puget Sound and the Olympics off of 37th at the end of Donovan.

Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^