Letters to the Editor: Orange ribbons are gone from trees on 175th
Friday, July 19, 2024
 |
| Photo by Kean Engle |
Help!
In early May, volunteers from Save Shoreline Trees tied orange ribbons around most of the 274 trees that the City of Shoreline intends to cut down for the upcoming 175th St Project: from I-5 to Stone Ave.
Forty-eight of those trees are on private land, so those trees were not tied unless with permission.
Similar, but yellow, ribbons indicated trees that the City would try to save, but that might be too impacted to make their survival possible.
We removed our signs after the June 3rd City Council meeting where these issues were discussed, since the signs were in the way of maintenance workers, but the City said we could leave the ribbons.
Ribbons are expensive, but worth it to us to help folks visualize what “cutting down 274 trees” really means), and to better understand the impact that this will have on shade, temperature control, pollution control, our water table, and surface water management.
Save Shoreline Trees is a local non-profit hoping to protect our mature trees which provide so many benefits to us all. Of course we are also for safe sidewalks and bike lanes for everyone, young and old, and we agree with the goal of getting people out of their cars and walking, riding, rolling as much as possible instead. .
Save Shoreline Trees is not about saving EVERY tree; that’s not practical or even desirable, but we also are convinced that this community does not need 13 foot sidewalks (as planned for 175th), nor should bikers go up and down a major and dangerously busy hilly street when alternatives pathways to the north are readily available at less cost and at a significant increase of safety for both bikers and walkers. If the City incorporated these sensible changes to their current plan, many of those big trees could be saved.
Sometime last Friday, July 12th, every ribbon tied around every tree on 175th St disappeared, including the ones that we had to scramble up the rockeries to tie. Vanished.
I would like folks to know that the City of Shoreline has assured us that they, like us, have no idea who took the trouble and considerable time to remove every ribbon without a trace.
In fact, the City took the time to check with all relevant Departments to make sure that they were not involved, which we appreciate.
If any one has any idea who did remove those ribbons on 175th trees, and why, we would love to know.
Thank you,
Trish Woollcott
Shoreline
Similar, but yellow, ribbons indicated trees that the City would try to save, but that might be too impacted to make their survival possible.
We removed our signs after the June 3rd City Council meeting where these issues were discussed, since the signs were in the way of maintenance workers, but the City said we could leave the ribbons.
Ribbons are expensive, but worth it to us to help folks visualize what “cutting down 274 trees” really means), and to better understand the impact that this will have on shade, temperature control, pollution control, our water table, and surface water management.
Save Shoreline Trees is a local non-profit hoping to protect our mature trees which provide so many benefits to us all. Of course we are also for safe sidewalks and bike lanes for everyone, young and old, and we agree with the goal of getting people out of their cars and walking, riding, rolling as much as possible instead. .
Save Shoreline Trees is not about saving EVERY tree; that’s not practical or even desirable, but we also are convinced that this community does not need 13 foot sidewalks (as planned for 175th), nor should bikers go up and down a major and dangerously busy hilly street when alternatives pathways to the north are readily available at less cost and at a significant increase of safety for both bikers and walkers. If the City incorporated these sensible changes to their current plan, many of those big trees could be saved.
Sometime last Friday, July 12th, every ribbon tied around every tree on 175th St disappeared, including the ones that we had to scramble up the rockeries to tie. Vanished.
I would like folks to know that the City of Shoreline has assured us that they, like us, have no idea who took the trouble and considerable time to remove every ribbon without a trace.
In fact, the City took the time to check with all relevant Departments to make sure that they were not involved, which we appreciate.
If any one has any idea who did remove those ribbons on 175th trees, and why, we would love to know.
Thank you,
Trish Woollcott
Shoreline
Posts
27 comments:
The "why" is pretty obvious.
The "who" are probably ordinary citizens who want to see 175th safe for pedestrians. These sacred trees can (and will) be replaced. If it's legal to tie these ribbons to trees then I imagine it's legal to remove them as well.
If you support walking, riding, and rolling as a means of transportation, the built environment you advocate for needs to reflect that. That means enabling the construction of places where common destinations are within walking distance and building roads that are safe and convenient for people to travel along outside of a car.
Save Shoreline Trees' ideas for 175th are misguided. You call 175th dangerous, so why don't you focus on making it safer? You were present at the June 3 city council meeting. You heard many people advocate for changes that simultaneously preserve trees while improving safety and comfort of non-vehicular transportation. Why do you ignore them?
I don't like shade I like the sun. I suffer vitamin d deficiency like many other Washingtonians I sure would like to have the sun shine on my face from time to time. Think about all the serial killers Washington is notorious for. If only the sun had blessed them.
The design for Phase 1 of N 175th from Meridian east to I-5 includes 13' wide and 12' wide "shared paths". No separate bike lanes. This means that all wheels including bicyclists and scooters will share the path with children walking to school, strollers, and all pedestrians. Hopefully this will be a safe sidewalk and all will be courteous.
Well said!
To Nonny who loves the sun and hates shade - if you hadn't noticed, there are lots of locations you can go to sit in the sun. Feel free to avail yourself of them. Trees help the environment and keep us cool. If you don't want to be under a tree, then don't be...
I cannot wait to hear the problems that arise from pedestrians and cyclists sharing the same sidewalk. Young children getting in the way of the cyclists? Cyclists having to go glacially slow to avoid killing someone? This is gonna work out really well.
Why remove the ribbons if not out of spite or a dislike of your community? People go out of their way to try to do good for the city, to let people know what's going on, and someone undoes their hard work. It's disrespectful.
Maybe we should focus on retreeing many of the open blighted areas along our streets as a way to compensate for the trees lost in this project.
It is misguided and simplistic to say that replacement trees will compensate for trees removed. Aside from the obvious, which is that it takes time for the new tree to truly replace the one removed in terms of benefits, we are confronted with some harsh realities that will contribute to a higher tree mortality rate--punishing summer temperatures, drought and the fact that the City lacks adequate funding to water and maintain these new plantings.
Save Shoreline Trees advocates for the safety of pedestrians and those with disabilities using our sidewalks. We also advocate for preserving trees because mature trees contribute to the health and well-being of all in this rapidly changing climate. A replacement tree will do very little for us for its first 15-20 years.
The shared use paths on N 175th will serve school children twice a day nine months of the year. Bicycles, soon scooters, and use of e-bikes are increasing. How is this safe? How many bicyclists daily will use the sidewalks vs. the number of school kids who use the sidewalks twice a day?
13,330 people are expected to move into Shoreline by 2044; N 175th Street will become even busier, making this "lifeline" far less safe for both bicyclists and pedestrians.
Not good having wheeled vehicles on sidewalks.
The “why” for removal is because those who disagree could no longer tolerate the presence of the ribbons. It is unfortunate that they do not identify themselves.
Regarding two previous comments:
- replacement trees, if they survive, will take years to provide the benefits that the mature trees are currently providing
- Save Shoreline Trees ignoring safety. Did the commentor not read Ms. Woollcott's entire letter?
There is more than one way to construct a safer N 175th. Safer for walkers, cyclists, drivers and even the trees. And it can all be done while costing taxpayers less money in both construction and maintenance.
Let's let common sense prevail. as advocated by more than 200 citizen letters to have City Council requested.
We need our big trees for climate resiliency now. Preserving our big natives is so much better than planting replacement species that will never grow as large or provide the same benefits. Our big trees shade more than people, they help cool the hard surfaces and reduce the costs of repair. They help control surface water runoff and limit taxpayer investment in drainage systems. Let's think about the dollars involved in unnecessarily removing trees. It's our tax dollars.
Our main reason for suggesting that as many large trees be protected as possible is that Climate Change is here, and large mature trees provide significant climate resilience that will be essential to the livability of our lovely city. “Replacement trees” take decades to get big enough to provide the same benefits.
Let me reiterate that we all want safe sidewalks. However we do not think 13 foot sidewalks are necessary (try measuring out 13 feet. It’s probably wider than you think).
More importantly, we think bikes, even those going uphill, are not a good mix with school children walking/talking along even a 13 foot sidewalk, or folks exercising their dogs on leashes, or elderly folks who might not hear well, and certainly not for those in wheelchairs, baby carriages, and strollers going up or down that hill.
There are alternatives to the north (178th) for bikes that we believe are safer for everyone, bikers and pedestrians alike. This is not anti-biker and certainly not anti safe sidewalks.
If you were at the meeting on June 3rd you surely heard me emphasize that.
Paving over less of the 175th corridor would require less of our tax dollars as well, including adjustments in current plans for stormwater control.
Many at the June 3rd meeting were passionate parents who are fed up with the narrow poorly maintained current sidewalks - and no question about it, the current sidewalks are totally inadequate, we all agree on that.
A few of the eloquent speakers were serious bikers who apparently love to get from A to B as quickly as possible at any price.
Altogether, pro and con folks both, about 30 people got up to speak.
Why are you ignoring the 228 letters that were written to the city council regarding the plans for 175th?
Here is a summary:
2 letters asked for more information so they could have an educated opinion (bravo for them!)
13 supported the project, 2 specifically because of the proposed bike lanes, and 3 because of the importance of better sidewalks, especially for school children.
201 opposed the plan in its current form.
42 discussed the importance of trees to combat climate change that is coming now, regardless of the number of cars on the road in the future.
18 (some of whom identified as bikers) said that a road as heavily trafficked as 175th was a terrible place for a bike lane, and that an alternative route should stick to smaller less traveled streets. They certainly did not want their children biking on that street, where loss of control might catapult them into traffic. There was also opposition to shared bike paths for obvious safety reasons.
Many thought better sidewalks were crucial, but that the 10’ and 13’ widths were excessive.
Importantly, many writers spontaneously mentioned the woeful lack of enforcement of traffic laws, and the persistent running of lights at Meridian and 175th., and begged the Council to do something about that.
I hope we can all listen to each other, and find ways to more forward as a community that cares about its future.
Cutting down so many trees while sensible alternatives have been submitted to the city for its N 175th St project, just doesn’t make sense in this day and age of climate chaos. Decision makers need to change with the times and give up the antiquated notion that it’s either trees or extremely wide sidewalks. Both can be done with some creative thinking and a willingness to change how things are done.
Expensive ribbons, eh? Maybe start a gofundme to get your $4 back?
Trish, I think we're talking past each other. Save Shoreline Trees is advocating for a solution that diverts vulnerable road users to other streets, while preserving trees. I'm advocating for a solution that makes 175th safer for vulnerable road users, while preserving trees.
I believe my solution is preferable because there are people for whom traveling along or crossing 175th is the most practical option. To reiterate, both solutions preserve roughly the same set of trees.
If you're open minded about this and willing to have a two-way conversation, I'd be happy to walk down 175th with you and discuss it.
Of course, I'd appreciate a chance to understand what you are proposing and I'm sure walking 175th together would be most informative. How do I reach you? Sorry - I don't know who you are since I believe several bikers proposed various options. Let me be clear, my personal feelings about using 175th for bikes have more to do with being an older person with some bad experiences walking pedestrian/bike shared paths locally, as well as being a mom and grandmother who has had loved ones in bike accidents.... I should have been clear I'm not speaking for Save Shoreline Trees about bike routes.
the salmon appreciate the shade so that they can actually survive now they just die in the sun congratulations I hope you think that you're super funny.
I guess they ran out of pride flags to slash. small minds.
The proposal to widen sidewalks at the expense of our beloved trees is deeply concerning. Our community deserves better than soulless, scorching concrete expanses. The current sidewalks, rarely used due to the street's unpleasant and unsafe conditions, don't warrant such drastic measures. Instead, let's embrace the beauty of nature and create a winding asphalt path, preserving our precious trees and providing a truly accessible experience for all. I urge you to walk the Interurban Trail and Ballinger Commons, a testament to how asphalt can seamlessly integrate with the environment. Unlike rigid concrete, asphalt is adaptable, easily repaired, and eco-friendly. We must resist the allure of harsh angles and embrace the flexibility that nature demands. Sacrificing our trees for wider sidewalks is a misguided solution that will only exacerbate existing problems and rob our city of its natural charm.
Trish: Thank you, I appreciate the opportunity to see a different perspective. I'll send you an email at the address you used to submit your public comment.
I really appreciate the LTE and the comments, mostly thoughtful, that have followed it. With the route options and better tree preservation proposed, both safety and a healthier environment are well within reach.
All projects should be examined early on to see what can be done to reduce their environmental footprint, and the lack of that preparatory step was missing here.
With all those trees out of the way, the path would be cleared to pour out untold tons of cement, the manufacture of which causes 8% of worldwide carbon emissions. In fact, there is nothing sustainable about cement as currently manufactured when you still have to consider its the basic ingredient: sand. The worldwide sand shortage is already driving up prices and taking a heavy ecological toll.
More here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sand-mafias-are-plundering-the-earth/
Followup: We still have no idea who removed the ribbons, or why. The plus side is these wonderful letters and comments from our community.
I do hope our city officials are reading them too.
I understand concerns about safety, but as far as I know, there haven't been any accidents involving cars hitting pedestrians on the sidewalks where trees are planned to be removed. This means that fears about the sidewalk being unsafe for walking are mostly unfounded, and raised sidewalks or barriers can provide a solution for safety. Cutting down the trees will literally turn 175th Street into a frying pan during summers without any gurantees any additional safety benefits.
Post a Comment