Letter to the Editor: Exclusive waters
Friday, August 2, 2024
The Shoreline Area News today (Aug.2) showed several views of the proposed development plan for our water park.
The illustrations revealed 11 parking stalls (5 disable,6 standard) and illustrated approximately 12 people using the lawn or water.
I would like to see an illustration of the off-site parking count and location and what the safe maximum count of users will be allowed each day.
Not being able to factor off-site parking facilitation, nor the maximum user counts, I did some simple math projections on the existing plan.
- 13,300 population LFP, 11 stalls= 3.3 years wait for each resident to park.
- An ample estimated 36 users= 369 days each group accommodated.
- Assuming 4 full months of use, new groups would be allowed access every 3 years.
2010 census reported 5,268 housing units in LFP. Using the low estimate of $5 million for development, plus $5 million purchase price, the average cost per 5,268 homes is $1,898.
There has been much acclaim from LFP officials how great the news of a water park to be used by all LFP residence, plus no restrictions to those not living in LFP. As with all good news, there is bad news as well and certainly the cost and access issues alone illustrate the poor judgement on the cities part in this
Masquerade of political promise. Only a few will ever be able to dip their toe in these exclusive waters.
I feel deceived by all the city hype over a poor judgement and promise for use.
Jack Tonkin
Lake Forest Park
Posts
3 comments:
I suspect the the mayor will push for more speed traps to make of the difference in the funds needed to support this endeavour!
I having a hard time following the "simple math" here. Bullet #1 seems to divide the population of LFP by the number of proposed parking spots. Concluding this number reflects a wait time isn't logically sound, as it isn't per "each resident," as cars generally carry more that one person, and it would be strange if someone parked there all day. Bullet #2 seems to divide the population of LFP by an unsupported 36 users a day. Is that 11 cars with 3 people for the whole day, or 11 cars with one, each staying for 3 hours? Not following. Even assuming as implied that the only users of this facility would be LFP residents arriving in cars (something completely unsupported - does each resident of LFP own a car?) assuming this is a time for each group to be accommodated means...what? Bullet #3 seems to account for the park available 8 out of 24 hours each day (4 months, or 1/3 a year) and factors that into bullet #2's result, again...meaning...what? The assumptions made on the arithmetic render any conclusion about appropriateness moot.
I do think it important to consider the ongoing costs of maintenance. I also think it quite specious to assume both the park only used by LFP residents arriving by car and staying for many hours each. And the "who's gonna pay for this?" can't be reduced to simple math. It is a variation on the common trope of "I have no kids in public schools, why am I paying taxes for that?" or my favorite from right here in WA, "I'm in Spokane. Why am I paying for WSDoT Ferries I never ride?" These questions have logical answers of course, as I like the idea of a educated (and engaged) population that should be the result of a properly funded and managed school system; and no I don't want to suggest that the residents of Western Washington not pay for those farm to market roads in Eastern Washington we never travel.
I applaud SAN for publishing critical letters, and I applaud Mr. Tonkin for community engagement. Indeed we need to be skeptical about our government's use of public resources. But this kind of accounting is misleading, and a good example of use of common logical fallacies. When applied to making public policy, poorly represented simple math can mislead and be inappropriately divisive.
The park is on the Burke-Gilman Trail, across the street from a gigantic sea of parking, and has transit access (including the future S3 rapid transit route)...seems pretty easy to access to me.
Post a Comment