what follows is a letter sent to councilpersontom rasmussen, the single member of seattle’s city council, who has responded to this matter with gravity and concern - a chronology of initial events is outlined
June 27, 2005
Dear Councilmember Rasmussen:
I cannot to begin to convey my appreciation for your generosity this past weekend. Your staff’s availability, analysis, and persistence, culminating in your site visit on Saturday are a model for meaningful and effective communication and city governance.
With the respect to the right-of-way case itself, I wanted to briefly summarize facts and chronology to assist in your further investigation and restoration assistance:
in early 2007, I submitted extensive plans to the City for restoration and native planting of the unimproved 11th Avenue East ROW - these plans were approved by DOT/Street Use after review by the City Arborist (permit #51253)
a new neighbor on Federal Avenue, Mr Jeff Wysong subsequently submitted a permit application to utilize the same right of way to allow access of large machinery and equipment to his backyard, where he was planning to build a sports-court
according to City arborist, Mr Tim Griffith, Mr Wysong’s permit was initially refused, because it involved cutting down of approximately eight mature trees - according to Mr Griffith, Mr Wysong protested and the denied permit was then taken out of the arborist’s office for review by others in the DOT
Mr Wysong contacted me at that point and we met with several contractors to address options - I have never questioned his right to access, but only his methods for achieving it
at that meeting, I proposed the temporary taking down of my perimeter fence on the east side of my house, so that his equipment could achieve necessary access without destruction of the trees
Mr Wysong telephoned me on Monday, May 21st, indicating he essentially supported this plan - I proposed a meeting over Memorial Day weekend to work out details
instead, on Memorial Day, May 28th, while I was away, a crew cut seven of the eight existing mature trees and dramatically pruned others - I returned home and was able to stop the cutting of the final tree - the workers were unwilling to provide contractor identification information
at that point I retained an environmental and land use attorney, Mr Peter Buck
the following morning, Mr Buck attempted to stop final cutting, pointing out Seattle City Ordinance #90047 (requiring permission by affected neighbors before the cutting of City trees by private individuals); Mr Buck also pointed out other probable violations: the work did not appear to have be done by a licensed arborist or tree cutting service; a required field site visit inspection immediately prior to the beginning of the project had not occurred - Mr Buck also noted evidence of major destruction of extremely mature city trees closer to the cemetery towards the rear of Mr Wysong’s property; some of that cutting appeared very recent
Mr Roy Francis, Manager of Seattle DOT Urban Forestry, who had been apprised of all of the above, personally apologized to me for city failures of procedure and assured me that that work would be stopped for a few days, while various issues were sorted out - nonetheless, Mr Wysong proceeded with his project, cutting down the final tree and moving in his equipment
Mr Bruce Hinckley, the landscape architect who drew the original Stangler planting proposal, revisited the site, pointing out that the removal of all existing vegetation and trees had radically altered the microclimate, changing it from full shade to almost full sun, a far more stressful climate to introduce contextually appropriate native vegetation and trees - he offered a revised plan, including introduction of more established plants, as well as new trees, that would not achieve comparable size or effect to those that had been destroyed for thirty to fifty years, depending on care and climate
these revised plans were submitted to Mr Wysong - they were rejected - Mr Wysong offered only to procure and plant 9-10 eight foot tall trees - he also stated (through his attorney) that he would not be responsible for maintenance, irrigation, or restoration of either underplanting or the new trees ….”Dr Stangler can arrange for maintenance of her own, or can purchase a guarantee on the trees if she wishes.”
in a telephone call with Mr Joe Bell, Director of Street Use and Urban Forestry Division on Monday, June 18th, I was told that Ordinance 90047 did not exist and that Mr Roy Francis had no right to commit to temporary suspension of the project
Mr Bell agreed to an onsite meeting with Mr Francis, Mr Hinckley, and me on the 18th - at that meeting it was recommended that I support Mr Wysong’s restoration planting plan, as it had already been approved by the City - when Mr Hinckley pointed out noone had been willing to provide him nor I with any detailed planting plan, Mr Bell told us we could access it through the Freedom-of-Information-Act
At that point, Mr Hinckley appropriately summarized our feelings by characterizing this whole episode and the City’s response as Kafka-esque
I have documentation of the majority of what has been described above, with saved correspondence, emails, voice mails, and personal notes.
Now that the damage has occurred, what do I want?
Regarding the City of Seattle:
a review of city processes so that wanton environmental destruction does not needlessly occur;
that there be consequences to those who knowingly violate City rules and regulations;
that citizens and advocates of the city are not put in the position of adversaries;
that better communication occur not only within the City government, but that the City be far more responsive to its citizens, returning calls/email and following up on expressed citizen concerns (however, I would like to single out Mr Griffith, Ronni Wolfe, and Mr Francis for their exceptional frankness and kindness)
Regarding the 11th Avenue East ROW:
this small area has historically provided access for drug traffic and criminal activity via Volunteer Park and Lake View Cemetery: its restoration is not only an environmental issue, but a public safety one, as well
I expect the City’s full support in achieving protection, restoration, and maintenance of the greenbelt, in accordance with the comprehensive plans that are already on file with the DOT
(Permit # 51253 above)
repopulation will likely also require a soil stability analysis, now that old roots and established plantings may not be sufficient to prevent soil slide from the cemetery and hill slope.
I believe this restoration of neighborhood safety and environment is now the joint responsibility of Mr Wysong and the City of Seattle.
At a time in our nation when there is such a major disconnect between what our federal government says and what it does, I find it especially demoralizing to experience such a dynamic locally with our City.
While our mayor assumes courageous national leadership in environmental protection, we are simultaneously hacking green in our own backyard.
We must do better.
I look forward to your response.
With gratitude and respect,
Ronnie
1 response so far ↓
1 can we fight city hall? // Oct 6, 2007 at 5:05 pm
[…] website will document the failure of attempted discourse and constructive resolution with the city to […]
You must log in to post a comment.