THURSDAY: Sell? Keep? Build? Preserve? Have your say on Myers Way

(Click to see full-size PDF)

Right about this time tomorrow – on what is likely to be another beautiful summer night – the city’s Joint Training Facility in southeastern West Seattle will be open to the public, a rare thing, for what might be the only community meeting about the fate of the land to its south, the Myers Way Parcels (lately labeled on some city documents as the Myers Way Properties).

Community advocates asked for this meeting, to provide a chance to hear as many voices as possible, and it’s likely the last meeting of its kind before the properties’ future lands in the hands of the City Council. As reported here in recent years, its fate has long been undetermined – the city had to buy all of it in order to get the land for the JTF, then declared the rest surplus, but a deal to sell it for commercial development fell through. Now, as reported here June 15th, preliminary recommendations suggest keeping some of it to expand the JTF, selling part of it for commercial development, and selling the rest of it to a concern that would preserve that section as greenspace.

The city has already determined that it’s not suitable to be developed for housing, because of a lack of infrastructure as well as some toxic contamination, but the mayor decreed last year that $5 million of the prospective sale proceeds would help pay for the city’s efforts to help people experiencing homelessness. Meantime, at least two community groups (here and here) have recently asked the city to delay a decision for reasons including the potential annexation of North Highline next door (NH residents are not expected to be asked to vote on that before November 2017). What do you think should be done? Whatever your answer, showing up to speak up has the most impact – the meeting is set for 6:30-8 pm; here again is the official notice, which includes information on how to comment if you can’t be there.

P.S. Among the many documents linked from the city website is this 109-page summary of some of the comments received as of earlier this month.

ADDED THURSDAY: A final city reminder about this meeting includes an addition we didn’t have word of previously – a 5:30 pm guided tour of part of the Myers Way Parcels, pre-meeting. All welcome.

3 Replies to "THURSDAY: Sell? Keep? Build? Preserve? Have your say on Myers Way"

  • john June 30, 2016 (8:31 am)

    $5 million for homeless.

    What do the opponents of the sale have to say about the homeless?

    Cass Turnbull falsely claims there is no connection.  There is.

    If the two groups seeking this land, offer to pay for it themselves and commit to restoring and maintaining it, I will offer financial support. 

    But for these groups to demand this land without addressing the $5 million homeless earmark, they should not be supported.

    I wonder how many people signing their petition at farmers’ markets were aware of the $5million for homeless?

  • Gatewood Guy June 30, 2016 (4:12 pm)

    I think it is perfectly reasonable for these groups to advocate that city money is spent for park land, just like other groups advocate for homeless services.  The city is projected to spend $47 million on homeless services in 2016, and that doesn’t include the amount spent by non-profits like CCS, Solid Ground, Wellspring, and a host of others.  Once this land is sold, it can never be recovered and we’ve lost a chance to preserve open space forever just so we can increase our one-year homeless spend by just under 11%.  Next yea, or five years, or however long the take to spend it, the money is gone and so is the land.  And we’ll have nothing to show for it.

  • Alan June 30, 2016 (4:43 pm)

    It doesn’t make sense to me that we should rush to sell something that is permanent in order to have money for a temporary fix. I’m not saying that we should never sell public land, but we should be very reluctant to.

    A presentation was made at the last HPAC meeting by Patrice Carroll from the city regarding the Comprehensive Plan update known as Seattle 2035. One of the adjustments that she indicated would have to be made was the amount of parkland available per capita, stating that there was not enough greenspace for the current allowance to work. This suggests to me that we should be VERY cautious about letting go of any space we currently hold.

Sorry, comment time is over.