Search Results

The two wading pools in our neighborhood, at Powell Barnett Park and Peppi’s Playground, have been closed for more than 5 years due to cutbacks in the funding by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The Parks Department has pushed for the development of water spray parks instead. Although spray parks consume less water because of recycling the water, they cost up to a million dollars to construct and are very expensive to repair. Wading pools are much beloved in our neighborhood because they have the advantage of low stress use by the smaller tots, plus a place for parents to dip their feet on hot days and talk with neighbors. Most of us have happy memories of our own childhoods or of parenting at wading pools. Instead of filling our convenient wading pools, the Parks Department wants our parents and children to travel to the Volunteer Park wading pool- which is an impractical trip by bus for parents with tots and not easy by car. Alternatively, the Department suggests using the spray park at Pratt Park, but that was recently shutdown. The spray park at Judkins Park was recently updated, but spray parks do not address the needs of the youngest children or provide the passive ambiance for parents. The communities served by Powell Barnett Park and Peppi’s Playground — Garfield, Madrona, Leschi, and Squire Park — are ethnically and economically diverse neighborhoods that should be benefiting from the wading pool program. Let’s ask the Department of Parks and Recreation to re-open the wading pools at Powell Barnett Park and/or Peppi’s Playground permanently starting this summer. ~John Barber

In our March issue, we featured the plight of the business owners on 23rd Ave. during the long construction project. Madrona newsletter editor, Barbara Parker, detailed the obstacles in running a business when no one could safely reach your business due to torn up streets and huge equipment. Re-routing buses eliminated would-be traffic as well. For long periods, one could not bus, drive or even walk to these businesses. We interviewed Sarah Berentson, owner of 701 Coffee; this is a relatively new business that came to 23rd when the plan for a 23rd Ave. “road diet” was already made. When I arrived at the coffee shop, Sarah was discussing the possibility of sharing yard waste, recycling and garbage containers with the other small businesses in the building. Her landlord seemed to agree that no one business filled the containers. This is just one example of Sarah‘s attention to expenses and detail. She has been the most vocal voice in the protests from the embattled business owners and the person who has urged them to organize. Sarah said she had been in business for one year on the date we talked (3/17/16.) I asked if she had known about the plan and she said, “Yes, the original plan.” (The original plan was to fully complete the section of 23rd between Jackson and Cherry before moving on to section 2 between Cherry and Union.) She felt she could handle disruption on the south side and when that was re-opened, the disruption would move to the north side of the business. But SDOT and SPU began tearing up 23rd from Jackson to Union and even beyond to Madison. She said she had been in negotiations to rent the retail space for nine months before the actual opening. She was proud of the fact that she was debt-free for many months; by September, she had 80 customers a day and met her expenses easily. It was in October that the business collapsed. The re-routing of the 48 had a big impact on business; Garfield students would wait across the street for the northbound 48 and the crowd was as much as 50 students. Many would dash across the street for an after-school snack. Since the students have limited time during school hours to purchase outside the school, any obstacles that keep them from reaching the café quickly, discourages the attempt. Sarah said that even Ezell’s right across the street from the school has seen a loss of business. Sarah said she was behind a few months in rent and they had sold their vehicle to stay afloat. Her family of six (with two high school and two middle school students) is living in a studio apartment. She even had to return their Vitamix to pay other bills; this was a blow as Fruit Smoothies are a popular item on the menu. She has since been able to replace the Vitamix. Sarah has completed a couple of inches of paperwork in an effort to obtain some financial help from the city, but has heard nothing yet. She feels that the gas explosion in the Greenwood area has changed the city’s focus. She still feels strongly that the business owners need to stay organized. We shared stories on “planned gentrification” of the area. I had been told by a local activist that the demise of the small minority-owned businesses was part of the 23rd Ave. plan. Sarah said she had seen drawings of the area where her small building was replaced by a multi-story apartment building with retail at street level. It would be too bad to lose the small businesses that exist and have them be replaced by big chain operations. Let’s support these small businesses and try to keep them open! Sarah takes pride in her ability to serve vegan food that even carnivores like! When mangoes are in season, she serves a delicious mango salad. She gets her croissants, pastries and bagels from the local Golden Wheat Bakery (reviewed in this issue by a Madrona resident.) The owner, Angel, was able to use her suggestions for a butter substitute to create delectable bakery items. I want to go back for lunch and try the cashew butter that she puts on bagels! ~Diane Snell

Coming soon to a backyard near you: a cottage…if certain changes to Seattle’s land use code go through. Proposed as a means to address the city’s increasingly unaffordable housing costs, the rules governing backyard cottages are being reexamined, in an effort to bring to market an increase in the number of this humble housing type. In the early ‘90s, state law was revised, obligating municipalities with over 20,000 residents to allow attached accessory dwelling units (ADUs, or what most people know as a mother-in-law apartment). Since 2010, Seattle has allowed property owners in single-family zones to build a second, separate residential structure on their property, a detached accessory unit or DADU, or in the more heartwarming parlance, backyard cottage. The target in large part for both of these modifications was affordability, while at the same time giving homeowners the opportunity for bolstering their long-term financial security, a means for getting something out of home equity without having to sell their home. The sticking point ever since has been one of implementation: remarkably few people in Seattle have pursued establishing a backyard cottage. The overheated housing market of recent years has brought the issue of affordability into sharp relief, renewing interest in the potential of DADUs to bring housing costs down and raising the question of why so little activity has occurred in the arena. Those familiar with the process began to point to a litany of rules that have likely been suppressing the backyard cottage appetite. Led in part by councilmember Mike O’Brien, the city has been looking into the specific impacts of certain regulations, while taking the temperature of the citizenry in public meetings and written testimony, testing our tolerance for change. One of the chief impediments identified has been reticence on the part of banks to loan for DADU projects. The culprit it would seem is the draconian penalty for violating city ordinance which, rather than just levying a simple fine, could result in the wholesale demolition of the structure. Considering that the DADU is likely the collateral for a construction loan, it’s easy to imagine that a bank might hesitate to take the risk. One of the avenues that could lead to this extreme scenario is the requirement that the property owner live on site (in either the primary or accessory unit), with no more than six months spent living elsewhere in any 12-month period. Seems harmless enough, and those arguing for keeping the ownership rule intact feel that without this rule, the DADU market will become a bonanza for developers, rather than a route to affordability for potential renters, and lead to instability and excessive transience in the neighborhoods. Others point out that the six-month limit becomes a serious problem for anyone who receives a job assignment that could take them out of town for more than a year. Moreover, if the homeowner decides to sell, the buyer must either abide by the same rule or tear the DADU down. Lending institutions are not fond of this level of uncertainty. That combined with the apparent majority of respondents coming down on the side of change would indicate a likely loosening of this regulation. ~Jeff Floor, Leschi CC Board Member and Co-Chair of the Land Use Review Committee

The Leschi Community meeting on April 6 at 7pm, is the last time for a public meeting for Leschi as a neighborhood to decide what we think is important to the future of the Leschi Marinas. Park property is on the edge of being turned over to a private firm, Foss Waterway Management, to take over the development of improving the marinas and managing them for 30 years or more. The Leschi North and South Marinas are owned by the Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation. The marinas are public park space. Do we, the public, want free access to use the docks and enjoy the close views of the water and the boats? Or, should the space be locked for use only by private tenants, the boat owners? Do we want to save Leschi Dock where the Christmas boats tie up and people sunbathe in the summer? Do we want to save the floating “Police Dock,” which the Leschi Community Council partnered with Washington Water Trails Association to build for use by kayakers and canoers? Do we want to permit renting marina space to jet skiers and speedboats, considering that these boats endanger swimmers, paddle boarders and small sailboats, as well as creating wakes that erode the shorelines? Do we want park space being taken for a meeting room for the boaters? Do we want to continue to provide exclusive parking spaces next to the Lake on park property for the boaters? These are all public policy questions that pertain to use of public lands and waters and to the concept of parks and recreation and what makes sense as healthful recreation that is safe and builds community. On April 6, we hope to have a meaningful public discussion. On hand will be representatives of the Parks Department and a member of the Public Advisory Team to explain the project and introduce some of the issues. It is expected that after our meeting, Parks Department staff will negotiate a contract with Foss Waterway Management and make a proposal about approving the contract to Seattle City Council by September 2016. ~John Barber

Leschi Marinas are at a Fork in the Path to the Future April 6, Leschi’s meeting at 7 pm, is the last time for a public meeting for Leschi as a neighborhood to decide what we think is important to the future of the Leschi Marinas. Park property is on the edge of being turned over to a private firm, Foss Waterway Management, to take over the development of improving the marinas and managing them for 30 years or more. The Leschi North and South Marinas are owned by the Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation. The marinas are public park space. Do we, the public, want free access to use the docks and enjoy the close views of the water and the boats? Or, should the space be locked for use only by private tenants, the boat owners? Do we want to save Leschi Dock where the Christmas boats tie up and people sunbathe in the summer? Do we want to save the floating “Police Dock,” which the Leschi Community Council partnered with Washington Water Trails Association to build for use by kayakers and canoers? Do we want to permit renting marina space to jet skiers and speedboats, considering that these boats endanger swimmers, paddle boarders and small sailboats, as well as creating wakes that erode the shorelines? Do we want park space being taken for a meeting room for the boaters? Do we want to continue to provide exclusive parking spaces next to the Lake on park property for the boaters? These are all public policy questions that pertain to use of public lands and waters and to the concept of parks and recreation and what makes sense as healthful recreation that is safe and builds community. On April 6, we hope to have a meaningful public discussion. On hand will be representatives of the Parks Department and a member of the Public Advisory Team to explain the project and introduce some of the issues. It is expected that after our meeting, Parks Department staff will negotiate a contract with Foss Waterway Management and make a proposal about approving the contract to Seattle City Council by September 2016. ~John Barber

Recently retired from the Seattle City Council after 18 years, Nick Licata will discuss his new book: Becoming a Citizen Activist. “Licata explains how to get organized, congregate power, and master the tactics for change. He is insightful in comparing effective communication with methods that just don’t work. Licata’s observations on the intricacies of power will empower any activist who wants to make a difference in today’s world.” March 2 — book signing: 7-7:30pm, talk: 7:30-8:30pm Central Area Senior Center, 500 30th Ave. S

The bee shelters are in place at the homes of the bee stewards. The bee cocoons will be placed in the shelters when the appropriate plants and trees begin to bloom.

At the EastPAC Meeting on January 18, 2016, Lt Bryan Grenon reported on crime statistics in the Central Area; residential burglaries are down, but car prowls are up, particularly in secure parking garages. A perpetrator will follow a resident’s car into the garage and proceed to take the contents of all the cars parked there. It is lucrative as these secure garages are usually associated with higher end apartments and condos. Police are notifying the residents and asking them to make sure no one has come into the garage while the door is open. Lt. Grenon said that gang feuds were related to the shooting at Pratt Park. Police responded within a minute and 2 suspects were arrested; a gun (previously stolen) was retrieved. One suspect had a long history of violent behavior. Gangs from Kent and Tukwila are mixing it up with south end gangs and local gang members. Grenon responded to a question about the Jungle shooting and said it was drug related. Scales were found at the site and 15 bicycles, when there were only half that number of temporary tenters. The Jungle is on state land adjacent to I-5, but local police handle any issues. The area abuts 3 different jurisdictions. The encampment was swept a few days later with case workers helping folks to find shelter. Stolen bikes are a big business; they are taken apart and reassembled with higher quality (stolen) parts and can be sold on the street for $100. Lt. Grenon recommended the Bike.index.org for registering your bike; it makes it easier to return property to its rightful owner.

We did not have a representative at this meeting; it conflicted with the CANDC meeting. Troy Meyers, EastPAC Chair, did report at the January CANDC meeting that violent crimes and robberies were down, but car prowls are up. One can see evidence of this in the posts on NextDoor Leschi. SPD advises never leave anything of value in your car.

Our February program features David B. Williams, a freelance writer focused on the intersection of people and the natural world. This talk is based on his recently published book, Too High and Too Steep: Reshaping Seattle’s Landscape (University of Washington Press). Previous books include Stories in Stone: Travels Through Urban Geology and The Seattle Street-Smart Naturalist: Field Notes from the City. Williams also works at the Burke Museum and maintains the website GeologyWriter.com. Williams spoke to us several years ago on his book The Seattle Street -Smart Naturalist. I have to recommend this book to anyone with children who have an interest in the outdoors; I took my grandson downtown with this book and we inspected the buildings to find the encrusted fossils. And his chapter on crows revised my opinion on these sometimes quarrelsome birds. Come and learn a little bit new about the history of this area and the gutsy folks who changed what was! There will be time for book signing. David B. Williams event February 3, 7pm Central Area Senior Center

Editor’s note: Last month we printed John Barber’s op-ed piece on dogs and parks, hoping to stimulate a conversation. We had one letter in favor of John’s views and one opposing view. Just a short message to say I completely agree with the opinions expressed by John Barber in his ‘Dogs in Parks’ editorial (January 2016). As a frequent walker through all the Leschi Parks, and someone who actually LIKES dogs, I do find off-leash canines a problem. On roughly half of my walks (including last Sunday), I find myself charged by barking dogs, often accompanied by owners saying things like “he/she’s actually very friendly”, or “he/she won’t bother you”...too late, the adrenaline rush that accompanies a charging-barking dog has already ‘bothered me’ and DISRUPTED an otherwise endorphin-filled exercise excursion. Stepping in waste, especially in Frink and upper Leschi areas, is another common mess that some dog owner has left for me to clean up. John sums things up succinctly in the last paragraph of the editorial when he states, “I believe that dogs outside should always be leashed”. Our “limited urban park lands” should be for the enjoyment of all - those with and without canine companions. ~Sue Moore, Leschi resident It was your editor who disagreed (to some extent) with John. I do agree that dogs should be on leash in public spaces, which solves most of the problems that John brings up; but I felt John was not in favor of more off-leash areas and I found that troubling. We take our two rescue dogs to the Genesee off-leash area and have found that many other users of this area have also rescued dogs. When one rescues a dog, you get what you get and they are not always as well trained as one you raised yourself. We rescued two older dogs, well set in their ways, and they do need a fenced off-leash area. I also disagreed with his last idea: “Public policy should encourage residents to choose small, less needy of exercise, pets…” As an owner of two medium-sized dogs, I found this insulting. We tend to adopt breeds we are familiar with and understand their quirks to some extent. Should we only rescue small dogs? What does this do to the no-kill policy at shelters? Will they need bigger and bigger facilities to house the larger dogs as policy encourages urban dwellers to adopt only the small dogs that get their exercise walking to the food bowl? As for the off-leash areas, I love the camaraderie, as these folks are all dog lovers. It is good to see the rescued greyhound standing regally and watching the other dogs running madly around; one can imagine him saying to himself: “Been there, done that.” It’s also a good way to get one’s puppy socialized to other dogs. Dog ownership is emotional; some of us empty nesters have found these furry creatures to be comforting companions. I think public policy should be directed to responsible dog ownership (leashed in public spaces and all poop scooped) and not toward limiting one’s choice of breed and limiting the all-important off-leash areas. ~Diane Snell, Leschi resident And this letter appeared on NextDoor Leschi: With all the changes proposed for neighborhoods throughout the city, ours included, it is important for all Leschi neighbors, renters and owners, to not only join the Leschi Community Council, but be an active participant in protecting this very special community. If you are not already a member or know someone who is not, I encourage you to join today! Ballard, West Seattle, Capitol Hill and neighborhoods throughout the city waited too long to organize. Let’s not be the next community to be “involuntarily urbanized.” ~Dianne Ramsey, Leschi

Join us for a look at Seattle’s early history as David B. Williams talks about his book, Too High & Too Steep: Reshaping the Seattle Landscape. Since settlers first arrived in Seattle, the city’s citizens have altered the landscape with an unrivaled zeal. We have regraded hills, reengineered tideflats, and replumbed lakes to provide better locations for business and easier ways to move through the challenging topography. And we are still at it, though now we also understand that earthquakes and rising sea levels have the potential to change us as much as we have changed the land. February 3, 7pm Central Area Senior Center, 500 30th Ave. S.