Tag Archives: Ingraham High School

More Details on The Ingraham High School Tree Victory by Save the Trees – Seattle

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

For the past 16 months a group of dedicated people working under the umbrella of Save the Trees – Seattle has been working to save the NW Forest Area at Ingraham High School. While a final resolution has not been reached, the end to the Seattle School District’s intransigence is much closer.
The Seattle Hearing Examiner’s ruling released last week on Ingraham noted that the NW Forest is a rare plant habitat and that it should be protected under Seattle City environmental law. Because DPD did not consider proper conditioning for the loss of rare plant habitat, the Seattle Hearing Examiner reversed and remanded that part of DPD’s decision.
We are not in the woods yet because the Seattle School District has 21 days to appeal the decision to the King County Superior Court. And while the decision says one way to mitigate the impact is to move the project out of the NW forest area, the hearing Examiner also suggests that a smaller footprint for the project in the grove could be considered. We do not believe that the project can be further downsized but we need to be prepared to take further legal action if necessary to save the trees.
Through the support of many citizens across the city we have paid off our legal bills for getting to where we are. We are in a much stronger position now with the evidence in the Seattle Hearing Examiner’s record and the decision. We will continue the legal battle if the Seattle School District does not end its misguided and senseless effort to destroy the NW Forest area at Ingraham when viable alternative building sites exist.
We have on tap Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann ready to represent Save the Trees – Seattle. Keith successfully secured the Injunction to prevent cutting down the trees last year when the Seattle School District withdrew their construction permits for Ingraham, trying to use a loophole in city law avoid further environmental review of the project.
This loophole in city law has now been repealed by the Seattle City Council and a stronger tree protection law has been put in place that will prevent tree groves like Ingraham’s NW Forest area from being cut down in the future.
The Seattle Hearing Examiner confirmed that the NW Forest area at Ingraham is a rare plant habitat comprised of a conifer/madrone/salal association. Seattle Urban Nature has assessed that only 52 acres exist in Seattle.

The decision starts with consideration of SMC 25.05.675.N.2 which states
a. It is the City’s policy’s policy to minimize or prevent loss of wildlife habitat and other vegetation which have substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological and/or economic value. A high priority shall be given to the preservation and protection of special habitat types…
b. For projects which are proposed within an identified plant or wildlife habitat or travelway, the decision maker shall assess the extent of the adverse impacts and the need for mitigation.
c. When the decisionmaker finds that a proposed project would reduce or damage rare, uncommon, unique, or exceptional plant or wildlife habitat, wildlife travelways or habitat diversity for species (plants or animals) of substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological and/or economic value, the decisionmaker may condition or deny the project to mitigate its adverse impacts…
d Mitigating measures may include but are not limited to:
i. relocation of the project on the site;
ii Reducing the size or scale of the project; …

The Seattle Hearing Examiner noted that her “review in this case is limited to whether the Director committed a clear error in her decision on the SEPA conditioning for the project.”
The Hearing Examiner stated,

Appellants have argued that DPD erred by failing to treat the NW grove as a rare or uncommon habitat under SMC 25.05.675.N.2. It is not clear whether DPD considered the grove to be rare or uncommon, but the northwest grove is an uncommon plant habitat under the SEPA policy. … The northwest grove is uncommon on account of the conifer/madrone/salal plant association which is present, and the relative scarcity of that association.
The proposal would reduce by half an uncommon habitat that the City’s SEPA policy says must be protected. Given the difficulty or impossibility of replacing this amount of habitat on the site, avoidance or reduction of impacts on the grove is required if such measures are reasonable and capable of being accomplished. In this case DPD did not evaluate whether the location or the structure footprint could be altered to avoid or minimize impacts on the NW grove, and this was an error in light of SMC 25.05.675.N.2.
The record is limited since no alternatives were required to be analyzed in the DNS, and the project was not subject to the City’s design review process, where designs are typically scrutinized for reasonableness. Appellants point to the alternatives rejected by the District as mitigation measures: building a second story on the existing LMC building; placing the addition in the north lawn area; or moving it to the south where the portables are located. Appellants also note that the planned courtyard area places the addition further into the grove”….

“… on the record here, the use of other areas on this 28 acre campus, or at least the reduction of the proposed building footprint, would not be unreasonable or unworkable. Therefore the decision will be remanded to DPD to require additional mitigation in the form of relocation outside of the grove, or at least reduction of the addition’s intrusion into the northwest grove.”

Save the Trees- Seattle believes the only reasonable and viable alternative is to relocate the building outside the grove, like on the open north lawn area. DOT Arborist Bill Ames suggested in an e-mail early on that “Tree removal in the NW corner of the site (the new addition) seems excessive and can be modified in favor of the existing trees. One option would be to site the addition nearer to the existing building and creating a walkway, as opposed to the proposed courtyard, between the new and existing building.”

The Seattle School District said this was not possible as current fire code regulations say any new building must be separated from the existing building by the width they made the courtyard. They do not want to add the building directly onto the existing building because this will block existing classroom windows.

In addition a number of the madrone trees are currently on the east side of the NW Forest area and would be cut down no matter how close the addition is to the existing structure.

The reality is there is no need to cut down any of the NW Forest. The Seattle School District asked Integrus Architecture to draw up an Ingraham Master Plan for how the school could expand in the future. They picked the north lawn site as a preferred site to put a future two story building and e-mails.

We discovered through a public records request to the Seattle School District e-mails confirming placing utilities on the North Lawn area so as to be prepared for this option. The current proposed building should be moved to this site now. The school can have both its new classrooms and save the trees at the same time.

There is of course no guarantee that the Seattle School District will take this easy solution to the problem. That is why Save the Trees –Seattle urges people to contact the Seattle School Board and Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson and urge that they end this battle now by moving the building site to the north lawn or some other location.
Here is Superintendent Goodloe Johnson’s email: superintendent@seattleschools.com
Steve Zemke
Chairperson
Save the Trees – Seattle

Save the Trees- Seattle Wins Hearing Examiner Ruling !

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

In a decisive victory for proponents opposed to cutting down 72 Douglas fir, western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees in the NW Forest area at Ingraham High School, the Seattle Hearing Examiner has ruled in favor of Save the Trees – Seattle and the neighbors.

In a decision dated last Friday and first available today, Seattle Hearing Examiner Ann Watanabe, “reversed and remanded in part” the DPD’s January decision to allow the Seattle School District to cut down the trees.Watanabe noted that “The Northwest Grove is uncommon on account of the conifer/madrone/salal association which is present and the relative scarcity of that association”.

She adds “The proposal would reduce by half an uncommon habitat that the city’s SEPA policy says must be protected. Given the difficulty or impossibility of replacing this amount of habitat on the site, avoidance or reduction of impacts on the grove is required if such measures are reasonable or capable of being accomplished. Therefore, the decision will be remanded to DPD to require additional mitigation in the form of relocation outside of the grove, or at least reduction of the additions intrusion into the northwest grove.”

Save the Trees – Seattle has supported the upgrading of Ingraham High School and believes that the school can build the addition without cutting down any trees in the NW Forest area. We can have both trees and new classrooms.

In a master plan for Ingraham the Seattle School District has proposed building a future 2 story addition on the North Lawn area. We believe the Seattle School District can stop further delay of the Project by moving the current project to that location now. Other sites are also available like on the South side of the school where the portables are being removed.

Where’s the Green Going in Seattle??

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

 

The Seattle City Council’s passage last week of Council Bill 116404 – the Interim Tree Protection Ordinance is a small step that is long overdue. The bill closes a loophole the Seattle School District tried to use at Ingraham High School to stop further environmental review of their ill advised decision to build a new addition to the school in a grove of mature trees.

The new interim ordinance will limit to 3 per year the number of trees larger than 6 inches in diameter tthat can be cut down on undeveloped property and on single family property larger than 5000 square feet. The bill extends tree protection to groves of trees by adding them to a definition of exceptional trees.

The interim tree protection ordinance is and has to be viewed as a stop gap measure to give the Mayor and the Seattle City Council time to develop a truly comprehensive approach to protecting and preserving Seattle’s natural green habitat for plants and animals and the rest of us that live in Seattle.

The interim tree protection ordinance is not a comprehensive tree ordinance and only partially addresses the issue of trying to stop the senseless cutting down of trees and tree groves, by limiting tree cutting on lots prior to development. But an even bigger problem is that it did not address what happens during the permit approval process.

Once developers decide to build somewhere, saving trees is not a high priority of the city’s Department of Planning and Development (DPD). In most cases trees always lose out to construction and development. The job of the DPD is to assist developers in their plans for construction and to gain approval for their projects. The interim tree ordinance still allows trees to be cut down during the development process, even if they are exceptional.

The Department of Planning and Development’s current tree policy is guided by the Director’s Rule 6-2001 on exceptional trees. The exceptional tree rule has a very limitied definition of exceptional that only applies to a small number of trees. . This policy, by Council staff’s own admittance, only potentially protects 1% of Seattle’s trees. That means 99% of Seattle’s trees are not protected.

Even that percentage is questionable because right now any property owner proposing a construction project can cut down almost any tree, no matter how exceptional; all they have to do is say they can’t build if they can’t cut down the tree. This is what just happened in trying to save an old cedar called Big Red in the Ravenna neighborhood.

One trick they use, which DPD seems to buy off on, is that the developer can propose to plant new trees, maybe even 2 to 3 for each one they cut down. Planting two inch saplings while taking out 100 year old trees is not any kind of equivalence. It is a rip off of our urban forest.

The rules to be classified an exceptional tree are very restrictive. Very few trees actually qualify to even be considered exceptional under the DPD’s decision process. For example, DPD’s exceptional tree rules says Douglas fir trees have to be larger than 36 inches in diameter to be considered. Of the 72 trees the Seattle School District wants to cut down in a grove on the west side of Ingraham High School, the largest Douglas fir is 30 inches. The trees in the grove are 75 years old, 25 years older than the school, but none of the Douglas fir qualify as exceptional.

The Ingraham site also has Pacific madrone trees which are rare in the city and declining in numbers but at Ingraham they are labeled as not exceptional because they are not young. The DPD says young madrone trees may be protected. At Ingraham the School District has been moving the understory area and cutting down young trees shoots of madrone. So mismanagement of the habitat is being rewarded by the City.

Tamara Garrett of the DPD in reviewing the Ingraham High School Construction Project repeatedly described the cutting down of the 72 trees that are 75 years old and represent 100 foot tall Douglas fir, western red cedar and pacific madrone trees as “Several mature trees situated in the Northwest Grove have the potential to be affected by the proposed project.” And “conversely, members of the public opposed to the proposal mainly cited concerns about negative impacts associated with the removal of several mature trees on the site” and “The planned removal of several mature trees from the area of the site could negatively impact the survival of existing spawning, feeding or nesting areas of the birds.”

One has to wonder at what point DPD considers the removal of trees more than several. Would cutting down Seward Park or the trees at Green Lake also be nothing more than ‘the loss of a few trees?” The problem is that the DPD has given no consideration to the value of tree groves (read urban green habitat) as distinct from whether any tree in a grove is exceptional.

Taking 1% of our current 18% tree canopy means we could potentially save only .18% of Seattle’s tree canopy according to the DPD’s Director’s Rules on exceptional trees. Can you really call this any kind of tree protection measure? This is a gross misinterpretation of the SEPA laws of the City of Seattle.

From a habitat sense, birds are not avoiding the Ingraham grove because it doesn’t have a 36 inch Douglas fir present. They are using the grove because it has many trees present, some 130 in all. And scientific studies show that the larger the grove, the greater the diversity of bird species. In an older grove of trees, like at Ingraham, vertical stratification also occurs as different species occur at different height levels of the tree canopy.

The Seattle City Council passed an ordinance last year asking the DPD to revise it’s tree policy to reflect the intent of the SEPA provisions in the Seattle Municipal Code and give protection to tree groves. While the DPD has drafted a new interpretation it still has not approved it.

The guiding rule that DPD should be using for tree protection is SMC 25.05.675 (N). How does one go from the requirement to protect rare and uniques plant and animal habitat to only protecting .18% of the tree canopy in Seattle?

You do it by not giving any value to Seattle’s urban green natural habitat. The City needs to take the environmental review out of DPD’s hands and make it independent from those involved in approving construction permits. One way to do this is to move environmental review of construction projects to the Office of Sustainability and the Environment. That sounds like their job is to promote sustainability and the environment. The DPD’s is not; it is to promote construction and development.

One other problem in trying to stop tree loss in the city of Seattle is that no one is tracking the trees being cut down. Current city law does not require anyone to get a permit to cut trees down, like many other cities do. DPD does not keep track of how many trees are cut down each month or year.

Seattle also has no tree inventory, so it truly does not know what it losing or gaining. The best estimate of the state of Seattle’s urban forest status comes form the Urban Forestry Plan which estimated an 18% canopy cover city wide two years ago, down from 40% in 1973. Without a city wide inventory and tracking system and permits no one is keeping count of the trees being cut down. No one.

There is no tracking possible without a permit system of what we are losing. We need to require permits before trees can be cut down.

Environmental review of habitat and trees really needs to be moved out of DPD and done independently – like by the Office of Sustainability and the Environment. It is obvious that when DPD interprets protecting rare plant and animal habitat under SMC 25.05.675 (N) as only requiring protecting so called “exceptional trees”, that it gives no real protection to our natural green habitat or priority to basic ecological values within the city.

Such a limited narrow interpretation is a serious misreading of the Seattle Municipal Code and the intent of SEPA law. It hinders and prevents efforts to sustain and expand Seattle’s urban tree canopy. It is allowing the continued destruction of important plant and animal habitat.

Any new urban forest plan and tree protection ordinance needs to be based on sound urban forest management practices and basic ecological principles. The current system run by DPD is allowing the continued destruction of Seattle’s green natural habitat and needs to be ended.

Mayor Nickels Joins Chainsaw Gang

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

Mayor Greg Nickels has decided to join the Seattle School Board Chainsaw Gang. In a decision based partly on challenged flawed documents produced by the Seattle School District, Mayor Nickels, through his Department of Planning and Development, has given the Seattle School District conditional SEPA approval to proceed with the Ingraham High School construction project.

The final project permit has not been approved. The public has until Feb 5, 2009 to appeal the city’s conditional SEPA decision. The City’s lack of commitment to save the trees under this decision brings the trees one step closer to being cut. Save the Trees -Seattle will be appealing the flawed decision.

The Seattle School District has proposed cutting down 72 large Douglas fir, western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees on the west side of Ingraham High School that are 75 years old and over 100 feet tall to replace some existing portables. The trees to be cut are seen in the picture above.

Ingraham High School can have both trees and classrooms. The open lawn area on the North side of the school in the picture above has been chosen as a future building site for the school and could be used now to build the proposed addition without having to cut down any large trees.

At 28 acres, the Ingraham High School campus is the largest public high school campus in the city. There are also other locations the addition could be easily built without having to sacrifice a unique urban forest area.

What hasn’t been debated publicly is that at the same time the Seattle School District is shutting down schools across the city because of excess capacity, it is proposing adding an additional 10,000 square feet to Ingraham High School above the 12,000 square feet it is demolishing and replacing. The School District has said it has an extra 3000 high student seat capacity yet is adding, according to its application, 200 more seats at Ingraham High School above the current 1200.

Why when the Seattle School District is experiencing a $37 million shortfall and closing schools is it not re-evaluating the $24 million it is spending for new parking lots and more classrooms at Ingraham High School?

The City’s decision notes that the Washington State Department of Natural Resources has classified habitat containing Douglas fir, Pacific madrone and Salal as a “rare plant community” in King County. Mayor Nickel’s DPD however accepts the School District’s incomplete and false statements that the understory does not have adequate species diversity.

One of the School District’s own arborist reports confirmed the species diversity is there despite the district’s repeated efforts to cut and mow the understory. Salal is growing back in a number of areas in the tree grove once mowing stopped last year. The DPD even confirms the viability of the unique habitat by noting that “the Northwest Tree Stand could eventually be restored.” The critical componet of the habitat is the 75 year old trees. The understory has been mowed repeatedly by the School District but is actually coming back once they put the fence up and stopped mowing.

Save the Trees- Seattle calls Mayor Nickel’s decision hypocritical because he has strongly touted the need to save trees in Seattle and increase our urban canopy. Yet when he has a chance to save a threatened urban grove of trees he fails to act.

Citizens have to spend time and resources trying to save trees across the city because the Mayor and City Council have failed to enact needed stronger tree preservation ordinances. Other cities like Redmond and Lake Forest Park for example require a permit to cut down any tree over 6 inches in diameter. Here in Seattle people can cut down almost anything they want without a permit or city permission. That is one of the reasons the cities tree canopy has decreased from 40% in 1973 to only 18% today.

The Mayor’s actions speak louder than words. His lack of commitment to save trees when given the chance like at Ingraham High School shows he has a stronger preference for more development and parking lots than he does for saving our green urban habitat. His lack of decisive action to save the trees joins him with the Seattle School District in their disregard for protecting our neighborhoods, our natural environment and our diminishing green urban canopy and diverse habitats.

Link to DPD website with decision on application #3009549: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/LUIB/AttachmentProject3009549ID31883009549.pdf

Help Pass Seattle’s Interim Tree Protection Ordinance – email City Council & Attend Dec. 15th Hearing!

On Monday, December 15, 2008 at 5:30 p.m., the Seattle City Council Environment, Emergency Management, and Utilities Committee will hold a public hearing at Seattle City Hall, 600 4th Ave, on an emergency tree protection ordinance for the City of Seattle. The proposal would provide for interim protection for most trees for a period of six months to a year while Seattle develops a long-range solution to increase the tree canopy and stop the loss of healthy, mature trees.

For more information, see the following links:

Public Notice of Hearing
Briefing Memo
Council Bill 116404

Your input is vital to helping to pass this interim piece of legislation to protect trees in the City of Seattle. This bill was drafted as the result of our efforts to protect the trees at Ingraham High School from being needlessly cut down when alternatives existed to the proposed construction site. When the Seattle School District withdrew their construction permits in August of 2008, we went to King County Superior Court and got an injunction to stop the trees from being cut down. The Seattle School District’s attempted clear cutting of the trees without further environmental review by the city of Seattle exposed a loophole in Seattle’s tree protection ordinances. Other tree battles like trying to save trees at Waldo Woods in North Seattle also are driving this legislation.

If you cannot attend the Hearing on Monday at 5:30 PM it is critical that you send emails to all the City Council members urging their support for Council bill 116404 to provide interim tree protection until strong permanent protections can be put in place.

You can write one e-mail and send copies to all the council members by cutting and pasting the e-mails below.
Emails are:
richard.conlin@seattle.gov; tim.burgess@seattle.gov; sally.clark@seattle.gov; jan.drago@seattle.gov; jean.godden@seattle.gov; bruce.harrell@seattle.gov; nick.licata@seattle.gov; richard.mciver@seattle.gov; tom.rasmussem@seattle.gov

This legislation is a first step towards strengthening tree protection laws in the City of Seattle. It is being attacked by so called “property rights advocates” who oppose efforts to protect trees. They are contacting members of the Seattle City Council with their opposition and we need to counter their efforts.

We need you to add your voice in support of the city stepping up and providing stronger protection for both individual trees and tree groves and our green urban habitat. Seattle’s urban tree canopy according to the city had decreased from 40% in 1973 to 18%. Unless we speak out our remaining urban trees are in danger of being lost because Seattle existing tree ordinance only provides protection to 1% total of all the trees through a very limited “exceptional tree” provision. Other cities in the region and in the US have much stronger protection measures.

Urge that the proposed legislation be amended to strengthen SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) provisions, that permits be required to cut down any tree over 6” in diameter, that tree grove protections are vital to protecting unique urban habitats and that the exemption for “additions to existing buildings” be dropped or clarified as limited to a certain size.

Passing Council bill 116404 is only a first step but we need to take it to protect trees while permanent legislation is being drafted up. We need to generate strong citizen support via e-mails and people attending the hearing on Monday as a show of support for protecting trees in Seattle. Please help. Thanks.

The Seattle City Council noted the following:

1. “The public hearing on the tree protections is taking place in the Seattle Council Chambers (one floor above the 5th Ave entrance to City Hall) on the second floor. A different hearing will be taking place at the same time in the Bertha Knight Landes room on the first floor of City Hall (one floor below Council Chambers). This hearing is on the Mayor’s proposed gun ban and also begins at 5:30. “

2.” The sign up sheet to make public comments will be available at 5:00 pm on the December 15, 2008 right outside of Council Chambers. People will be called in the order in which they sign up.”

3. The City Council also suggests that you provide “your comments in written form either to all Council members via email, in hard copy when you come to the hearing, or via the USPS. This is important because comments are normally limited to two minutes and many people have more than can be said in that time. Submitting your comments in writing will ensure that the Council hears what you have to say.”

Ingraham HS Stages Pep Rally to Cut Down Trees

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

On Tuesday night at Ingraham High School in North Seattle, the Seattle Department of Planning and Development (DPD) held a public meeting on the Ingraham construction project. As you know, Save the Trees – Seattle and others in the community are opposed to the Seattle School District cutting down 68 trees in a grove on the west side of the High School when other locations exist on the campus where the addition can be built without cutting down any large trees.
The trees to be cut are the 100 foot tall 75 year old Douglas fir, western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees in the distance in the picture. The grassy area in the foreground is one place Save the Trees – Seattle says the new addition could be built, saving any large trees from needing to be cut down. The Ingraham High School master plan actually says this open lawn area is where a future addition could be built an Ingraham. Why not now?

Many neighbors and others turned out to support saving the tree grove and to urge that the project be moved. There was also a very large contingent of vocal students and parents and teachers frustrated by their long standing grievance of classes being held in rundown mold infested portables for too many years.

The Principal at Ingraham stated that he made a concerted effort to turn out students and parents and teachers to support the project. With his encouragement the students basically staged a pep rally for the project. This was not unexpected considering what they have had to put up with in a substandard learning environment.

Those opposed to needlessly cutting down the trees on a campus, which at 28 acres is the largest in the Seattle School District, sympathized with the frustration of the students and parents and teachers who for too many years have been forced to take classes in substandard portables that are in terrible shape and have mold. Teachers and students complained of getting sick. Some of the portables house special needs students but do not have running water or bathrooms.

The Seattle School District has let the situation get out of control and is now trying to make the neighbors the villains for their negligence. The Seattle School District’s approach has been to deny they have any responsibility for delaying the project and blame neighbors who love trees more than students as what is preventing the project from going forward

But Save the Trees – Seattle and the neighbors support the long overdue upgrading of the classrooms. We are not, however, the villains just because we also don’t want to needlessly destroy a unique urban forest when viable alternatives exist on the campus for building elsewhere. One location we suggested was the North lawn area which Ingraham actually picked as the site if a future addition was to be built after the current project.

It is rather ironic that the Ingraham Master Plan produced as part of this project can propose building on this North lawn location in the future but it is somehow not possible to build there now and spare the grove of trees. They are serious enough about retaining the North lawn area for a future addition that in the current proposal it is the only area on campus where they do not propose planting trees.

Two wrongs do not make a right. Not upgrading or maintaining the school in a responsible way for students and teachers in the past and proposing to cut down 68 Douglas fir, Western red cedar and Pacific madrone trees to now do the upgrade is only compounding the past mistakes by avoiding responsible stewardship of both our schools and our natural urban habitat.

The Principal testified that he went around to different student groups to recruit them to come to the public meeting to support the project as is. It is very hard for any students to take on the Principal publicly and say they opposed cutting down the trees. I have spoken with both students and teachers who opposed cutting down the trees. At least one teacher was told to stop any efforts to get students to oppose cutting down the trees because that was political and not education. The teacher felt threatened and that her job was at stake.

The Principal is the authority figure at the school. Student recommendations for college frequently come from the Principal. Is it any wonder that teachers and students who oppose cutting down the trees might feel intimidated or threatened if they spoke out. I remember when I contacted Martin Floe about our arborist looking at the trees he personally told me to not talk to the students. I guess he was afraid of them hearing anything contrary to his position. So much for an open dialogue at Ingraham.

What Floe has forgotten is that he is acting in a capacity of public trustee for a public school funded by taxpayer dollars. He has tried to characterize the neighbors as NIMBY’s which means he doesn’t even understand the term. We are not opposed to renovating the school and in fact believe it is long overdue. I am aware of no one in our group or neighbors and other tree advocates that are opposed to the renovation. We voted for the BEX bond issue. Our tax dollars are paying for the project and we have the right to express our views as much as anyone else.

Unfortunately the process set up by Martin Floe excluded the community and neighbors from the initial selection of the site and design of the project. Meetings of the School Design Team were held in secret with a few parents and teachers personally selected by Martin Floe. The public’s only chance to comment on the proposed project was earlier this year after the building site had been chosen and the design done. And we were then told we could not comment on the site anymore since that decision was already made.

At last night’s meeting, as I publicly stated, I do not think anyone there opposed the decaying portables being torn down and replaced with modern classrooms. Unfortunately it was obvious that the only option given to students and others to get new classrooms was to build in the tree grove. And blame the neighbors, rather than the School District for its inadequate review and closed review process, for preventing them from getting new classrooms.

The issue at this point is a legal one, whether or not the project is in compliance with city and state SEPA laws. We are pursing the legal process afforded the public to review the project.

The meeting was part of the public process for approval of land use permits for building in the City of Seattle and is proceeding on the normal timetable, except for the delay caused by the School District withdrawing their permit application in August in an attempt to just cut the trees down. The King County Superior Court issued an injunction to stop the trees from being cut down without any review by the City of Seattle. The City of Seattle is expected to make a decision in the next few weeks. The City does have the authority under the city’s SEPA laws to further mitigate the project, including moving it to save the tree grove. We will let you know what happens.

Seattle School District Refiles Application to Build Ingraham High School Addition in Tree Grove

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

 

Your comments now can help save the trees at Ingraham High School in North Seattle from the chainsaw!

If you have not yet heard, the Seattle School District has refilled their application to proceed ahead with their construction project at Ingraham High School. Here is the permit website: http://web1.seattle.gov/DPD/permitstatus/Project.aspx?id=3009549.

Comments need to be sent by Nov. 13, 2008!!! (note -deadline was extended)

The Seattle School District has filed to build the project in the same location as before – in the grove of 100 foot tall, 75 year old Douglas fir, Pacific madrone and western red cedar trees on the West side of the High School. This will result in the cutting down of 68 of the trees.

As you may remember, Save the Trees – Seattle was successful in temporarily stopping the Seattle School District from cutting down the trees in August after the District withdrew their permits. But the Injunction was only temporary and the school district has refiled with the Seattle Department of Planning and Development to go ahead with the Project.

The Judge at the time ruled that it was premature to file our appeal of the DNS (Determination of Non-Significance) on the Environmental checklist issued by the Seattle School District, even though the Seattle School District said we had to file then or lose our right to appeal.

Judge John Erlick of the King County Superior Court noted that the City of Seattle had the power to alter the project or put additional conditions on it and until the city approved the permit, the final project could be altered by the city. The Judge felt it was premature to rule on the merits of the case.

This is of course the hope of those opposing the trees being cut down and why your comments to the city are so important. The city has the option of saying the environmental impacts are significant in the proposed location that results in so many trees being cut down and ask the Seattle School District to move the project to another location.

Right now the Project has only been reviewed within the Seattle School District. Now it is the City of Seattle’s turn to review the Project for compliance with city laws, including our land use and environmental and SEPA laws. This is your opportunity to comment on the project and it is important that as many people as possible respond and urge the city to not approve the Seattle School District’s plan to cut the trees down. Comments must be sent by Nov. 13, 2008.

The fact is that there are other locations at Ingraham High School that the addition can be built on that do not require that any large trees be cut down, including the open lawn area on the North side of the school. They do not need to cut the trees down. Neighbors support the renovation which is to replace decaying portables at the school but not in the tree grove. We can have both education and trees on the Ingraham campus, which at 28 acres is the largest public high school campus in Seattle.

Important points to make to help save the trees:

1. Seattle’s latest Comprehensive Plan in the Environment Element states that the city should “strive to protect and retain certain trees and groups of trees that enhance Seattle’s historical, cultural, environmental and aesthetic values” and “work to achieve a sustainable urban forest that contains a diverse mix of tree species and ages in order to use the forest’s abilities to reduce storm water runoff and pollution, absorb air pollutants, provide wildlife habitat, absorb carbon dioxide, provide shade, stabilize soil, and increase property values.”

2. In addition the Comprehensive Plan’s policy is “to strive to achieve no net loss of tree canopy coverage starting in 2008, and strive to increase tree canopy coverage by 1% per year up to a total of 40 percent, to reduce storm runoff, absorb air pollutants, reduce noise, stabilize soil, provide habitat and mitigate the heat island effect of developed areas.” Seattle’s urban tree canopy has gone from 40% in 1972 to 18% today.

3. The west grove of trees at Ingraham HS was acknowledged by the Hearing Examiner for the Seattle School District to be a de facto park area used by students and neighbors for passive recreation and would be lost if the trees are cut.

4. SMC 25.05.675 N Plants and animals. City SEPA law states that it is “the City’s policy to minimize or prevent the loss of wildlife habitat and other vegetation which have substantial aesthetic, educational, ecological and/or economic value. A high priority shall be given to preservation and protection of special habitat types… A high priority shall also be given to meeting the needs of state and federal threatened, endangered and sensitive species of both plants and animals.”

5. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources through its Natural Heritage Program has classified the habitat in the west grove as a rare plant community in King County. The plant association includes Douglas fir, Pacific Madrone and salal. Pacific madrone trees are in decline in the region and need to be protected.

6. The band-tailed pigeon, which feeds on the fruit of the madrone tree, and has been seen in the Ingraham neighborhood, has been listed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife as a priority species. “Priority species require protective measures for their survival due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration ….”, according to the Department.

7. The Seattle City Council’s recently passed tree grove resolution stated that , “Section 25.05.675(N) of the Seattle Municipal Code allows for preservation of trees as mitigation when a project would reduce or damage rare, uncommon, unique or exceptional plant or wildlife habitat, wildlife travel ways, or habitat diversity for species of substantial aesthetic, education, ecological or economic value”

8. The Seattle School District’s DNS (Determination of Non-significance) is not a mitigated DNS. This means they are under no obligation to do anything they say they will do if they cut the trees – like plant more trees or protect the east grove of trees. The Seattle School District has a terrible record at Ingraham of trees dying that they previously planted.

9. Removing the trees creates drainage problems because the trees help control runoff and absorb water.

These are some points you can make but please write up in your own words your personal comments. Add any other reasons that you believe as to why the trees should be saved.

You can send comments 3 different ways:

1. Click on this link and you can just fill in your comments right now and send them in for the project. http://web1.seattle.gov/dpd/LUIB/CommentEmail.aspx?BID=358&NID=8971&P=3009549&D=10/16/2008

2. Send comments to: Tamara.Garrett@seattle.gov

3. Send comments to:

DPD/Attention Tamara Garrett
700 5th Avenue, Suite 2000
PO Box 34019
Seattle, WA 98124

Please include your name and address so you can be kept updated on the project, and be notified when there is a public meeting.Note the comments are on Permit Application #3009549 on the Ingraham High School Renovation.

Please send a blind copy – bcc to me at stevezemke@msn.com so that we can track the response and input we are getting if you send by separate e-mail and don’t use the form in the link above.

Even a few short sentences are helpful. We need to show strong public support from as many people as possible for saving the trees and moving the addition to another site, like the North lawn area at Ingraham.

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 Tips on Making Effective CommentsAlthough the quantity of letters DPD receives regarding land use activities may indicate the extent of neighborhood or agency interest, it is the relevance of the comments—the information they contain—that will most affect a project’s outcome. Here are some tips on making your comments effective:

Briefly explain who you are and why you are interested in the project.
State your concerns clearly and succinctly using objective language.
Comment only on issues relevant to the decision being made.
State opinions and preferences, ask questions, and propose alternative solutions to particular issues. State informed opinions and, where possible, include data to support your opinion.
Review the project’s technical reports or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) data, comment on conclusions, assumptions and the data collecting methods.
Keep focused on your objective. You want DPD to hear your concerns and be compelled enough to investigate further.
Identify the topics you want to include in your letter and how you want to organize them.
Ask for studies that you think are important but have not been provided.
If the proposed project is subject to SEPA and you think it will have significant environmental impact, request that an EIS be prepared.
Provide your own information.
Identify project features that you like and think should not be changed.
Provide any comments about the project’s compliance with the Land Use Code.
Ask to be added to the project mailing list and request a copy of the notice of decision. (Copies are sent via U.S. mail, s o please provide your mailing address when making request

For reference:

Here is the environmental checklist for the project:
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities/BEXIII/Ingraham/2nd_revision_IngrahamSEPAChecklist.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

see also

www.MajorityRules.org/blog – numerous posts
http://saveingrahamstrees.info/About_Us.html
http://www.saveseattlestrees.org/Ingraham.htm

Judge halts Tree Cutting near Ingraham High School – http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008112745_trees14m.html

Judge – Tree Cutting at Ingraham High needs city approval – http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008138212_trees26m.html

Thanks for your help!

Steve Zemke
Save the Trees – Seattle
stevezemke@msn.com
206-366-0811

Please call if you have questions.

Please forward this link to others who might respond. Thanks

PS. Save the Trees – Seattle still owes about $4000 to their attorneys. If you can help with a contribution it would be appreciated. Checks can be made out to “Save the Trees – Seattle” and sent to Save the Trees – Seattle, c/o Steve Zemke, 2131 N 132nd St, Seattle, WA 98133

Please note revised date for sending in comments. The current updated date is by Nov. 13, 2008.

Seattle Tree Massacre on 5th Ave NE

Clearcut, massacre, slaughter, call it what you want, Saturday while I was driving down 5th Ave NE toward Northgate I suddenly came across the above scenes at 123rd NE and 5th Ave NE.

The pictures tell a story in one sense but it is also a part of a larger story that is re-occurring too often in Seattle. It’s not one we should see in Seattle in this day and age. Yet the remaining groves of trees in Seattle are threatened and disappearing under the bulldozer and chainsaw just like in the pictures above.The west tree grove at Ingraham High School is only on a temporary stay of execution as the Seattle School District has reapplied for its permits to build the same identical building as before in the exact same location. The open lawn area on the North side of the school, among other locations on the largest public high school campus in Seattle, could easily accommodate the new addition without any problem. But the Seattle School Board doesn’t get it and doesn’t care. They have forgotten that they serve at the pleasure of the voters and most voters want to save trees, especially when viable alternatives exist.

Waldo Woods in the Maple Leaf area is also facing the chain saw as proponents for saving the area recently lost their appeal before a Seattle Hearing Examiner. Faced with the only possibility being going to Superior Court, Waldo Woods supporters face the possibility of having to post a huge bond of hundreds of thousands of dollars, which even if they could raise, they would lose if they lose an appeal in Superior Court.

And now the mowing down of a greenbelt area in the Pinehurst Community. One lot cleared and 4 more to go. The 5th Ave NE lot appears to have been cut down illegally. After a Sunday press conference by Save the Trees – Seattle and checking with the City, it turns out that the owner never received approval of his building permit for a single family home or permission to log the area. A cease and desist order has been issued to the owner but the trees are gone.

As Seattle’s tree canopy and green habitat continues to diminish, tree by tree and grove by grove, Seattle becomes less and less an Emerald City. So where is the city in all this. Seattle has a terribly weak ordinance pertaining to protecting trees.

It’s main thrust has been trying to save “exceptional trees” but this definition is so restrictive that few trees get saved. And tree groves currently have no protection because the Seattle department of Planning and Development under Greg Nickels does not consider them as valuable habitat areas to be saved.

The Seattle City Council has directed the Director to re-interpret the Director’s Rule to follow what they say the original intent was – to save not just single trees but also groves of trees because of their habitat value.

The Seattle City Council is currently considering an ordinance to declare a moratorium on cutting down tree groves on vacant lots until a revision of Seattle’s Tree Ordinance can take place. Such a revision must include a more enlightened vision of saving more of Seattle’s threatened green heritage because Seattle’s current tree policies are not saving tree groves.

Seattle Public School Violates Court Injunction!

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

On Monday Judge Erlick of the King County Superior Court ruled on behalf of the plaintiffs Save the Trees – Seattle and put in place an Injunction to prevent the Seattle School District from cutting the trees or destroying the habitat in the grove of trees on the West side of Ingraham High School. This afternoon, a contractor for the Seattle School District drove into the center of the grove and commenced putting up another fence in the proposed construction area. Using an air hammer the contractor started driving steel posts into the ground.

This action was in direct violation of Judge Erlick’s ruling that the trees and habitat were to be preserved and protected while the Seattle School District resubmitted its construction permit application to the City of Seattle. Steve Zemke of Save the Trees – Seattle called the police and contacted their attorney, Keith Scully, of Gendler and Mann, who contacted Ron English, Attorney for the Seattle School District who contacted MidMountain Contractors who called their employee to stop any further work.

The truck was driven out of the grove a short while later. The call to the police was cancelled as they had not yet shown up. Tree Solutions and other consultants have advised the Seattle School District to keep trucks out of the trees because they damage the tree roots and affect the survivability of the trees. The Seattle School District continues to ignore this advice and the court order prohibiting damage to the tree grove until the environmental review process is completed.

Why was the Seattle School District not able to obey the court order and inform all contractors of the Injunction prohibiting any activities which would harm or destroy the trees or the habitat of the groove? The Project manager at Ingraham is John McWilliams and he should be held responsible along with Don Gilmore who is in charge of the BEX program.

John McWilliams and Don Gilmore were both present in Judge Erlick’s courtroom on Monday when Judge Erlick ruled. Did they not understand what the Judge said? As Project Manager for the Ingraham Project isn’t McWilliams responsible for what the contractors do? Or is this just going to be called another one of those “mistakes” or “miscommunications” and brushed aside?

Contactors working at Denny Sealth in West Seattle recently cut down trees and bulldozed an area along Longfellow Creek on the Sealth campus at the same time an appeal was underway before a Seattle School District Hearing Examiner. This action destroying that habitat made that part of the appeal mute and resulted in the Hearing Examiner saying the School District needed to up the loss of trees there from 25 to 35 to reflect that action. The actual result was contrary to a statement by Seattle School Board member Peter Maier who at the time was seen on television saying that all that happened was that a few trees were nicked.

 

Save the Trees- Seattle Wins Injunction to Halt Tree Cutting

Threatened NW Tree Grove at Ingraham High School

Save the Trees – Seattle was granted an Injunction today to prevent the Seattle School District from cutting down the trees at Ingraham High School. The battle is not over, but Judge Erlick of the King County Superior went further than expected and granted an Injunction prohibiting the Seattle School District from cutting down the trees until after the Seattle MUP process is complete.

Judge Erlick ruled that the appellants met all the tests required for an Injunction and that the Seattle School District, by withdrawing their permits for construction, was putting the cart before the horse. He ruled that the School District first had to comply with the City of Seattle’s environmental review through the MUP process and that it was premature to rule on the issue until after that process was complete because there was no way of knowing what conditions the city might place on the project.

All in all Judge Erlick saw through the Seattle School District’s attempt to use a loophole to evade and avoid further environmental review and just cut the trees down. He also ruled against the Seattle School District’s attempt to claim Save the Trees legal appeal was adding to the cost of the project, noting it would only take 2 days to cut the trees down according to the School District. The School District was trying to require that Save the Trees post a $200,000 bond but the Judge said no. The $7500 bond is still in effect however.

The Seattle School District is planning to petition to throw the case out, claiming that Save the Trees filed their appeal in the wrong court. They are also going to raise a bizarre claim that Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson was not served notice of the lawsuit. A signed statement was submitted to the Court by Goodloe–Johnson. To answer this charge Keith Scully, the attorney for Save the Trees presented to the Court a signed document by the process server that Goodloe- Johnson refused to be served. Her representative, the legal department was served instead.

It seems the “new” Superintendent is just another one of the old boy’s network in the Seattle Public Schools, willing to join in their charade and mockery and disdain for the public process. What a mockery they are making of public involvement, openness and following the spirit of the law. She has joined with the Seattle School Board in trying to find loopholes in the law and avoid environmental review by the City and Courts of the Ingraham High School renovation project. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

To date the only environmental review done was done within the Seattle School District. And the Seattle School District has shown their true lack of respect for environmental and land use law through their recent actions and intent to just cut the trees down and end debate.

The Seattle School District is trying to make the issue one of trees versus education. This is not the case. The Seattle School District could easily move the project to the North side of Ingraham High School where an open lawn area now exists. No large trees would have to be cut down as a result. The school can have both trees and new classrooms.

A critical next step is to try to get passed a long overdue updated Seattle tree preservation ordinance to try to close the loopholes being used by the School Board and developers to get around protecting plant and animal habitat and trees and tree groves in Seattle.

Save the Trees has legal bills to pay along their success. Please show you support for their successful but continuing battle with the Seattle School District by contributing to help pay their legal bills. They owe about $4000 and unfortunately will owe more, as they have to go back to court to defend against the School District’s continuing attempts to throw out the case.

Make checks out to Save the Trees, c/o Steve Zemke, 2131 N 132nd St, Seattle, WA 98133

Thanks for your help.

And take a moment to celebrate the success of Save the Trees!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008137606_webtrees25m.html

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/environment/archives/147052.asp