I post Debbi's email on the blog (below) as a pertinent contribution to this on going saga. I take note that she talks of Ericksen Park and that it is the right way to frame this issue: we are talking about destroying a park.
A very small park but how many are there in Winslow? And who would benefit?
Thank you Debbi for taking the time.
Good morning,
This note is to remind you that on Monday, 3 PM, in the Council Chambers, Public Works Dept will be presenting its transportation study regarding connecting Hildebrand and Ericksen Avenue.
Attached is the packet emailed to Public Works Committee members: Kjell Stoknes, Kim Brackett, and Chris Snow.
The information for this upcoming Monday meeting did not get up on the COBI website until late Friday as the "IT department was experiencing difficulties".
Public Works though did put signs up late Friday at two locations on Ericksen and Wallace. One was on a traffic median (completely useless location - can't read it driving by and endangered pedestrians who crossed mid street to read it) the others were near sidewalks (good placement). No signs were actually placed near or at the entrance of Ericksen Park - where the greatest impact would be had.
Page one is the agenda for the meeting and starting on page 6 is the Ericksen - Hildebrand Discussion Update.
As staff states on page 7 of the packet, in its memorandum dated March 31, 2008 (Is it even March 31 yet?), "The study finds and staff concurs, that the connection of Ericksen and Hildebrand Lane will not have a detrimental traffic impact."
The memorandum further states: "After review of the
study and discussion by Committee members, staff would
like to receive guidance on next steps, which could
include the following:
1. Recommendation to the City
Council to accept the study fulfilling a portion of
the Winslow Way Master Plan requirement.
2. Consider a
recommendation to the City Council to add or defer an
Ericksen Avenue - Hildebrand Lane Connection project
to the CIP (Capital Improvement Plan).
Then it goes onto list a number of WT (Winslow Tomorrow) updates that were adopted to the WMP (Winslow Master Plan).
What you have is a systematic means of destroying a neighborhood through language and studies.
What you have are "outside experts" and "consultants" who do not live here, come and for a good fee - $75K - will be used to override community vision and neighborhood voices.
As a former member of the Winslow Tomorrow Congress this is perfect example of how strong community visions for a better tomorrow were manipulated by monied interests to a particular outcome: connect Hildebrand - Ericksen through the Ericksen Park.
This is a perfect example of why there is distrust of Winslow Tomorrow.
What this study does not state is the impact to the neighborhoods through the potential loss of open green space downtown.
This flies in the face of Winslow Parks Task Force report and recent articles that found that we do not have enough parks and open space downtown for the current and future population growth of Winslow.
"Despite the overall increase in parkland, officials
still worry about a dearth of parks in Winslow, which
is slated to absorb the bulk of the island’s
projected growth. The Winslow Parks Task Force –
composed of citizens and park officials – submitted
its final report on the issue in November. The task
force said efforts to purchase land for parks in
Winslow should be intensified. 'Now it’s time to
green our downtown, to make it a lovely inviting
place, now and in the future,' the report says.
'Failure to acquire parkland to serve the ultimate
population of Winslow would be a dramatic failure of
government to serve its citizens.'" - March 18, 2008,
Bainbridge Review.
Ericksen Park does not need to be purchased. It is a
green space the city already owns. It is a green space
that should be retained. It is a green space this
Ericksen - Hildebrand Lane Traffic Study recommends
putting a road through.
As well Ericksen Park its neighboring retention pond
were mitagation for the clear cutting and filling of
wetlands of that development property. Yesterday's
mitigation should not become tomorrow's road.
What this study does not state is the increase of
traffic on what is a relatively calm quiet downtown
neighborhood residential street. This neighborhood
connection is the preferred pathway for bikers,
pedestrians, walkers, and elderly.
Is there ever a point when we the people have more
priority over it the car?
Anyone in these surrounding neighborhoods (Blue Heron,
Co-Housing, Island Apartments, Janet West Housing,
Knetchel community housing, the Villa, the Camelia
Apts, Eagle Nest Apts, Windemere Condos off Madison,
Cottages on Ericksen) will all tell you he/she chooses
walking/biking on Ericksen Avenue over Madison Avenue
and 305 - always!
Walking/biking on Ericksen Avenue is safer and more
pleasant, as it has less white noise of constant
traffic.
Interesting that this subject would come up again when
on March 17 the Public Work Committee council members
stated they did not at this time wish to discuss the
Ericksen - Hildebrand issue. Kjell Stoknes can give
the exact language that he retold to me recently.
Something to the effect of: Kjell, as chair of the
Public Works committee, called the question and the
council members said no.
One can see it continues to be pushed forward though
when individuals financially benefit and are paid to
continue to ask the question. Not only is one
individual lawyer paid by Joshua Green properties to
advocate for the Ericksen - Hildebrand connection. The
same lawyer is now also paid by the Bainbridge Island
Chamber of Commerce as its new "council liason."
One can see it continues to come forward when it is
the community dime to spend and community property to
be taken.
Joe citizen loses money each time he/she has to take
off work to go to these meetings. Those that are
actually paid to be there benefit from the question
being raised and raised again...for them - its
billable hours.
Joe citizen loses when his neighborhood green space
becomes a road.
Joe citizen loses when his neighborhood no longer is
pleasant but filled with white noise of traffic.
Joe citizen loses when his neighborhood becomes a
traffic shortcut for cars and delivery trucks.
We, the neighbors, ask that the Public Works council
committee members: 1. not accept the traffic study as
its scope was too limited (focused only on car and
traffic impacts) 2. do not add Ericksen - Hildebrand
to the CIP. 3. Spend our tax payer money for the
benefit of people not cars.
If you cannot attend Monday's meeting as you are
working or taking care of your kids, please email your
comments to the Public Works council committee members
and please cc me as well so I can present your
comments to the meeting:
"Kim Brackett" <kimbrackett@msn.com>
"Chris Snow" <snowc@bainbridge.net>
"Kjell Stoknes" <kjell041645@yahoo.com>
debbilester@yahoo.com
Please say yes to Ericksen Park and to the Winslow
Master Plan vision of a walkable/bikable/livable city
which retains its neighborhood character.
Kindest regards,
Debbi Lester
Ericksen Neighbors
P.S. Please forward to neighbors. Thank you.