Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Sustainability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sustainability. Show all posts

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Sustainability IS the Goal, but the Journey is also the Point

Interpretive Signage at Cromwell Park

Shoreline and many cities in the northwest are making sincere attempts at sustainability. Let's give ourselves credit for the work we've done.

• Sustainability Strategy Adopted by Shoreline City Council 2008


Councilmembers meet with Congressman Jim McDermott
at his Wash DC office, discussing projects including
Solar applications, photo credit-Steve Schneider
• Green City Hall

Solar Array at City Hall created in partnership with Shoreline Solar Project
Spring 2010
• Four new Parks.  Southwoods, KruckebergOff-leash Dog Parks and Kayu Kayu Ac and major restorations at Cromwell and Richmond Beach Saltwater Park.
Southwoods Park dedication plaque




Cromwell Park Restored Wetland








Worker sorts "Silva Cells" for tree pit installations



"Silva Cells" Technology being installed on Aurora Project
to provide a better natural drainage strategy

• Green Street Project
17th Ave NE is transformed into a "Green Street
with pervious sidewalks and bioswales
Shoreline's Community Backyard Wildlife Project

Shoreline's Backyard Wildlife Project Certified this year
And great work being done in the private and non-profit sectors
North King County Green Business Conference 2008
sponsored by Shoreline Chamber and City of Shoreline
at Shoreline Community College

We still have much work to do clearly, but we are making a serious attempt to 
address sustainability.  Tree Preservation is one area that LFP has made great progress on and
Shoreline needs to catch up.

Street Trees Were Removed on 15th NE this Spring
Before Working with Neighborhood
And Historical PRESERVATION is clearly an area needing better work! 
Ronald School at risk now due to SSD Plans
But we have very active citizens who want Sustainability to be our "Watchword"! 
Let's focus the energy of these citizens and get to work on the challenges we face! 


Monday, August 9, 2010

Opinion: Sustainable Future with Parks and Open Space

This treatise forwarded from POSA, a longstanding organization that has championed the vision of an enhanced Parks and Open Space system for Seattle and beyond. It is in keeping with the original concepts put forward by the Olmstead's in their brilliant designs for our community.

SEATTLE’S PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ADVOCATE’S VISION FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
by John Barber
Originally published by Kent Kammerer

Cover Image of Joan Hockaday publication
"Greenscapes-Olmstead's Pacific Northwest",
which reflects a similar vision to the 
POSA Treatise. Seattle has many Olmstead designed parks and institutions such as the UW Campus Friends of Olmstead Parks website


SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOODS --  The goal for neighborhoods should be stand-alone sustainability  --  walk or ride convenient transit to jobs and shopping,  pleasant pedestrian qualities, trees and other greenery, easy access to natural environment and to outdoor recreation,  energy-saving facilities, storm-water absorption and retention using natural methods, and friendly-neighborhood design, and a clean, toxic-free environment
TREES  --  A future of a warmer, drier climate with more extreme storms is all the more reason -- beyond the aesthetics, cooling shade, water absorption, oxygen-generating, dust collection and processing, habitat, carbon sequestration, human scale and spiritual values provided by trees -- for increasing our urban forest
The responsibility for providing trees should fall on all property owners.  To rely on streets and parks to supply trees is simply inadequate.  All property owners should have trees, at least medium sized, on their property or pay into a fund to plant and maintain trees nearby.
A serious urban forestry strategy, centralized tree management, a continually updated tree inventory covering both public and private property, and an urban forestry commission to oversee the process are necessary steps.  Existing mature trees are a special treasure to be protected to the maximum.
CLEAN ENVIRONMENT/ HEALTHY LIVING -- Continually reduce and eventually eliminate manmade toxic materials from publicly assessable open space,  continually improve energy-efficiency, avoid projects that significantly contribute to global warming, reduce heat islands, protect waterways from pollution and siltation, strategically provide habitat for native wildlife, and otherwise continually improve conditions relating to human and environmental health.

SHORE, STREAM-SIDES, AND WETLANDS -- Multiple means should be applied to naturalize Seattle’s wealth of shores, stream-sides and wetlands.  The unique shore-to-uplands relationship for people, wildlife, and wetlands should be nourished.  Wherever possible create natural wildlife corridors to connect water to woods.  Build on no wetlands;  preserve and maintain them in healthy natural condition.
Thornton Creek North Branch Flowing Through 
Park #1 near Jackson Park 
photo credit-Janet Way

WELCOMING, NEIGHBORHOOD-FRIENDLY PUBLIC OPEN SPACES --  Our parks and other public open spaces should be welcoming to all.  Parks and open spaces in the urban environment fill an essential role of reduction of stress.  They should be a place to relax our eyes and senses from the urban glare and din, to feel refreshed and to meet our neighbors.  And they should add, not subtract from the grace of the surrounding neighborhoods.   Where appropriate, they should be a place for celebrating families and neighborhoods.   Parks should treat all visitors equally and serve the city residents guided by principles of universality of use, social equity, and enjoyment.
FREE PUBLIC PARKS -- Use of public lands should be free.  Fees or charges should only be related to the cost of services or products provided when a park facility or part of it is reserved for exclusive use.  Nothing should be imposed that prevents a potential park user from access to public land and facilities, except for access to areas that require security, like most administrative and maintenance spaces, or access that interferes with reserved recreational use.
CHILDREN IN NATURE, SPONTANEOUS RECREATION --  A healthy future includes providing healthful activities for children, from the youngest ages, that bring them (and us) in a better relation to nature and by holding open to myriad forms of fun.
Kids secret "hideaway", Thornton Creek Park #2
photo credit-Janet Way

INTEGRITY OF OPEN SPACES -- Much of the value of public parks lies in the contrast of a green environment with the busy activity of the built environment.  Dedicated public open space should be designed primarily for the enjoyment of pedestrians and should be kept free of facilities or activities that are unrelated to the recreational, cultural, historic, and landscape qualities of the space.  A key instance is the need to permanently remove the SR 520 ramps (a major regional transportation facility) from Washington Park Arboretum.
                                           
                   Thornton Creek Park #6 Wetland/Beaver Pond with Heron Hunting for Fish
                                                            photo credit-Janet Way
PEDESTRIAN USE -- Increasingly, pedestrians should be given primary or at least equal status in public open space.   Transportation devices like woonerfs, in which motorized vehicles and pedestrians share space and other traffic calming features should become the norm in parks and quiet residential streets.


ACCOMMODATION --  Our parks, street-scapes, and other open areas should be managed and improved to address the needs of the urban public.  Accommodation means anticipating the needs of the user-public -- wide enough paths, benches, picnic tables, comfort stations, and trash containers are only a few of the traditional forms of accommodation in parks.  Maintain the active sections of parks in a way that encourages the greatest use.  An exception from maximum use is the sensitive environment places.  Natural habitat areas should be treated in a way that assures protection from misuse or overuse.  
Another form of accommodation is meeting the expectations of enjoyment of green, quiet spaces when visiting a park;  new park uses that may conflict with this expectation must be carefully considered and addressed if possible by converting existing facilities or by consolidation in areas already the center of recreational programs.  Green, quiet areas, next to residential areas, are essential antidotes to the built, hard surface places that predominate the urban environment.  
A periodic survey of the populace should probe and identify how open space is used and how needs for recreation and open space are met or not met.  This survey would guide management and maintenance practices and the planning of new developments.
Hamlin Park in Shoreline, New Sports Facilities
Supported by Bond Funding
photo credit-Janet Way

AFFORDABILITY/SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PUBLIC’S TREASURES -- All public facilities should be maintained at a sustainable level, and major upgrades or restorations should have budget priority (except for projects vested by the Parks Levy) over the development of new facilities, until the backlog (approximately $ 800 million in estimated costs) is reduced to a manageable level.  New facilities should be economical to maintain and easy on the environment.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Trees




Trees -
Shoreline Tree Ordinance Process Underway

Hope you can get involved with creation of a Tree Ordinance for Shoreline. At this time, the code is scattered throughout the Development Code and is difficult to follow and many think it is not very effective.

The value of trees to our City in well Known. Shoreline even has trees in our city logo!

We need your voice in this discussion!



Tonite (Wed, Mar 10th)
East side of City
Wednesday, March 10
6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
Public Health Laboratories
1610 NE 150th St
there will be a meeting at the Public Health Lab to discuss the upcoming Tree Ordinance process. In Shoreline, many citizens have been studying this issue over many years.

NEXT there will be another meeting:
West side of City
Wednesday, March 24
6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
Richmond Beach Congregational Church
1512 Northwest 195th St

Then the process will move to the Planning Commission again to formulate
the working legislation.

Last year a citizens Tree Committee put forward a proposal to create a tree ordinance that is roughly modeled after Lake Forest Park's Interim code. This formed the basis for the proposed version the City Staff are working with as follows:

Overview & History

On January 5, 2009, the City Council added to the Planning Commission's 2009 Work Program the project to study development regulations for trees, and asked staff to return with ideas for specific issues to include in the scope of work for proposed amendments to the tree regulations. Staff came back in February with ten "decision modules" (DM) and asked the Council which ones it wanted to include in the scope. There was Council consensus to refer DM 1-9 to the City staff and Planning Commission for input/consideration and to postpone work on DM-10 because it was related to a code amendment for vegetation management plans in critical areas. The nine DMs are as follows:

DM-1 Establish a baseline urban forest canopy city wide. This baseline would provide the context for the Council to make a policy decision, most likely in 2010, about a long-range City target for desired tree canopy. The target could be no-net loss of a city-wide percentage of canopy, or an increase or decrease of some magnitude, keyed to specific schedules. With such a baseline and target in place, the City could then monitor the overall City canopy, say every 5 years, to assess its health and identify any further programs or code amendments as needed.

DM-2 Reorganize SMC 20.50.290 to separate clearing and grading provisions into a different subsection because the intent, purpose, exemptions, and regulations are different. Clearing and grading regulations will need to be modified to be consistent with the newly adopted storm and surface water manual.

DM-3 Change the provision in SMC 20.50.310.B.1 that allows the removal of 6 significant trees every 36 months without permit. This is potentially a huge hole in our city-wide tree canopy because we don't regulate or monitor this provision. Theoretically, if we have 16,000 single family lots then as much as 32,000 significant trees can be removed per year without review or monitoring. People sometimes cut trees that they think are not in a critical area and therefore do not notify the City.

DM-4 Amend SMC 20.50.310.A to establish clear criteria and thresholds when a tree is hazardous that is reviewed by a City third party arborist. Add requirements for replacement trees when hazardous trees are removed. Currently, property owners use their own arborists to determine a hazardous tree without thresholds to determine when it is hazardous. If the City doesn't agree with the assessment then we can require a third party assessment. This costs the property owner twice and prolongs a basic decision. Requiring the use of a City's arborist makes the assessment more objective and less costly for everyone.

DM-5 Amend SMC 20.50.360 to allow for reasonable tree replacement ratios and the possibility to replace trees on other land within the City. Most development sites do not have the room to plant all the replacement trees. These replacement trees are easily cut down after the 3 year protection period because they are not defined as significant trees.

DM-6 Amend SMC 20.50.350.B.2 to remove code provisions for 30% preservation of significant trees if a critical area is on site because trees in critical area trees are already protected under the Critical Area provisions of SMC 20.80. A relatively small critical area could trigger 30% preservation on the entire site when the intent is to preserve the critical area and its trees. The change would keep the base significant trees preserved as well as all trees in the critical areas.

DM-7 Amend SMC 20.50.350.B.1 to remove and replace the flat code provision for 20% preservation of significant trees. The existing rule is inequitable because, for example, a site that is covered with 100 trees would have to retain 20 trees, while a small site with only 5 trees would only have to save one. We could devise a more equitable system that requires tree preservation based at least partially on lot size.

DM-8 Reorganize and clarify code provisions SMC 20.50.350.B-D that give the Director flexible criteria to require less or more trees to be preserved so that site design can be more compatible with the trees. The current code requires that all trees with the following qualities shall be preserved - in groves, above 50 feet in height, continuous canopy, skyline features, screen glare, habitat value, erosion control, adjacent to parks and open space, and cottonwoods. In general, these are good qualities but if all these requirements are applied inflexibly, the result would excessively preclude development on many lots.

DM-9 Amend SMC 20.30.770(D) to provide greater clarity and specificity for violations of the tree code. Currently, code enforcement has difficulty proving violation intent and therefore exacting penalties.

Staff has been at Planning Commission several times in 2009 to discuss tree regulations. At the July 9 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented a modified purpose section and a different approach to the core requirements of tree retention and replacement using a tree credit system. On September 3, Staff brought back a modified version of the tree credit system that tested other scenarios and resolves a number of issues: simpler to understand, provides more effective protection for larger and more viable trees, assures that trees which must be removed are offset with replacement trees, and recognizes the reasonable property rights and expectations of owners. For more details on the proposed tree credit system, please see the meeting memo in the table below.

Next Steps

At its September 3 meeting, the Planning Commission indicated they wanted to pursue staff's recommended approach to the Purpose, Retention, and Replacement sections of the tree code and have staff return the next time with the full draft tree code.

The full draft will include recommendations for tree retention in other land uses besides single family, for hazardous and landmark trees, for tree protection during construction, and to add clarity to tree violation and enforcement sections. The study session on the full draft is scheduled to come before the Commission in spring 2010.


Saturday, February 6, 2010

NW Flower and Garden Show Promotes, Urban Farming, Color and Whimsy






NW Flower and Garden Show Promotes, Urban Farming, Color and Whimsy

Had a lot of fun visiting the garden show on Friday. Here's my photo album.

Themes of this year I noticed are: Urban Farming, Whimsy, Amazing Creativity, Bright Colors and Environmental Values and Sustainability. Show continues through Sunday, 2/7. It's easy to take the bus from Northgate.
See website for details:

Images include the following -

Fancy Fronds Display Garden, Kruckeberg Botanic Garden, National Wildlife Federation, Orchid Society and more.

Very inspiring to "GET OUT THERE"!