S. Lake Union Park meeting - Seattle

[Trapper]

his is your chance to make your voice heard. At 6:30, the Seattle Parks Dept is having a meeting regarding the S. Lake Union Park. For those that don't already know, this is where the schooner Wawona is docked. The Parks Department would like to have all the ships and shipwright buildings gone, in favour of a sterile, concrete park, with non-native plantings, a model boat pond, and oh yes, some signal flags to give it a maritime feel. You notice from this description that there is no place for the Wawona at this new park.

The plan that the maritime heritage groups have come up with would turn the area into a 19th century living history park, with the ongoing restoration of the Wawona as a focal point.

One and all are invited to come and voice your opinions. It'll be at the old Naval Armoury Building on South Lake Union.

email me for further info.

Fair winds,

Trapper

[Coastie04]

Wish I could make it. They dare to call it a maritime park when they want to get rid of the Wawona?!? 'Tis why I don't like the city. A living history park would be much better, and might even become a tourist attraction. Just think of how many people visit Mystic Seaport or the South Street Seaport. What a shame. I hope the meeting goes well, and that the maritime heritage groups are successful.

Coastie

[Trapper]

Thanks! Here's some information from the Seaport, for those that live too far, but would like to comment:

"...We hope that a large number of you can come to the meeting, and that many of you will offer comments. Whether or not you come to the

meeting, you can give your comments to the Seattle Parks Department by emailing colleen.browne@seattle.gov

We suggest that your remarks offer positive remarks about how maritime heritage supporters can work with the Seattle Parks Department to create a park that will provide benefit to the public. Criticism alone is not likely to have any effect. We would like to make a convincing case that maritime heritage groups would make effective partners in developing the park..."

Any and all letters would be much appreciated. Colleen actually likes the Wawona, but there needs to be an obvious interest for her berth to be guaranteed. Letters from out of town might serve to show people the possibilities of Wawona and tourism.

Thanks for the interest!

Fair winds,

Trapper

[Trapper]

A bit more information from Alice:

A reminder about the public meeting of the Seattle Parks Department

tonight, Feb. 10, at 6:30 p.m., in the Naval Reserve Building at South

Lake Union. It appears that your voices may be having some effect on

influencing the Parks Department, but a good turnout of maritime

supporters is needed at tonight’s meeting. If you cannot come to the

meeting, you can email your comments to the Seattle Parks Department at

colleen.browne@seattle.gov

Here are some notes from a meeting on Monday, Feb. 7, between Colleen

Browne and SHIP. The comments are my opinions only, although I suspect

there are many who share them.

Colleen Browne, the project manager for the South Lake Union park plan,

met Monday with SHIP (Seafaring Heritage in Partnership). SHIP is a

meeting of the maritime heritage organizations of South Lake Union.

Colleen was responding to a letter with park plan suggestions that SHIP

sent to the Parks Department. Here is a summary of some of the

information given at the meeting, and some comments.

Question: What would take to change the ‘land form area’ shown on

the plan to an area that could be used for maritime heritage programs?

(This is the area south of the Armory building that is currently

occupied by Northwest Seaport’s yard and buildings. The plan shows

these buildings demolished and replaced by a grassy area.)

Colleen’s answer: “An exciting visionary plan backed by the ability to

implement it.”

My comment: In order to maintain a ‘footprint’ for maritime

heritage in South Lake Union Park, three things are needed. The first

is continued activism by maritime heritage supporters. The second is

some sort of overall leadership that can speak for all the varied

elements of maritime heritage and is capable of raising the needed

funds. It seems likely that the Parks Department is waiting to see if

that leadership organization will develop from SHIP, or the Maritime

Heritage Task Force, or an interaction of both. The third element

needed is to make use of this area in the best way we can at the

present, to provide programs for public benefit. (If you are interested

in helping with this, come to the program planning meeting on Feb. 19.)

Question: What would it take for Wawona to have permanent moorage at

South Lake Union?

Colleen’s answer: “That’s really a question for Ken Bounds. But my

impression is that what is needed is for Wawona to be open to the public

more, to have more going on, more volunteers – more like the Center For

Wooden Boats.”

My comment: This is precisely what we are trying to do. Volunteer

involvement greatly increased during the past year. Your volunteer

efforts can make a difference! We also need your public comments to

remind the Parks Department of the wonderful programs that are already

occurring on Wawona, and that Wawona has been open to the public more

than any other historic vessel at South Lake Union. Keep telling the

Parks Department that Wawona must be moored at South Lake Union, and

should not be forced to move.

Question: What is the time frame for implementing the “land form area”

portion of the plan?

Colleen’s answer: The only portion of the plan that is moving ahead at

this time is the replacement of the bulkheads at the northwest corner,

the construction of the new dock and wooden sidewalk in that area, and

replacement of the bulkhead on waterway 4, next to the Center for Wooden

Boats, and building the abutments for the bridge. This is the only part

of the park plan that has funding. The Seattle Parks Foundation is

working on raising funds for the rest of the Park. The land form area

is the last part of the park that would be constructed and “frankly, the

least exciting,” said Colleen.

My comment: This may give maritime heritage some time to develop a

leadership organization that has the ability to implement an alternative

plan for this area. Maritime heritage supporters need to continue to

urge the Parks Department to keep this area for maritime heritage, and

not to demolish the existing buildings, most of which were donated and

constructed for maritime heritage programs and would be expensive to

replace. We also need to ask the Parks Department NOT to go ahead with

building the bridge abutments, and to continue to look for a solution

that will allow a bridge that opens.

The bridge over waterway 3 was discussed. We are concerned that the

bridge shown in the plan would block any possibility of large vessel

moorage in waterway 3, and that moorage will be needed for events like

Tall Ships festivals. We suggested a bridge that could open to let

large vessels through. Colleen said that technical problems with an

opening bridge would make it too expensive.

My comment: Please urge the Parks Department to continue to seek a

solution for this problem. When a major maritime heritage center at

South Lake Union becomes a reality, the need for a bridge that opens

will be obvious. A cheaper bridge does not save money in the long run,

if it has to be replaced with an opening bridge later. In the meantime,

blocking the waterway will limit our ability to make the maritime

heritage center grow by staging large events.

Colleen said that the vessels now on the west wall (Arthur Foss,

Duwamish, Twilight, Swiftsure) will be moving to the Maritime Heritage

Wharf before setup begins for the Summer Nights Concerts. They are now

trying to complete the electrical connections at the Wharf so these

moves can take place.

My comments: This is a crucial moment for our maritime heritage,

with some of our most significant vessels moving to the Historic Ships

Wharf. It is critical that the Seattle Parks Department continue to

offer moorage to these vessels at very low cost. This is fair, because

of the public benefits that these vessels provide, and because the

Maritime Heritage Foundation put up $2.2 million of the $3.2 million for

the Historic Ships Wharf. Much of this money was raised with the

understanding from the donors that these specific vessels would be

moored there. It would be a mistake for the Parks Department to see the

organizations that own these vessels as a source of revenue; every penny

of their extremely limited funds goes into providing public benefit.

As far as I know, none of the vessels has signed a moorage agreement

with the city for the new wharf. I have no idea what negotiations may

be under way; and this information is not likely to be public until the

agreements are complete. The public needs to comment to the Parks

Department that our historic vessels need low cost moorage, to make sure

that Parks understands this crucial need and the public support for it.

Also discussed were the possibilities for use of native plants and

Native American design elements in the park, and the future of the Naval

Reserve building. Decisions about the use of this building will be made

by Ken Bounds and the Mayor.

My comment: Maritime supporters need to urge that this building be

used for a maritime museum. This will require a large amount of

start-up funds, and a maritime heritage leadership organization that can

raise those funds. In the meantime, the Parks Department could

facilitate the process by allowing maritime heritage groups to use space

within the building at little or no cost for events and interim

exhibits. Parks has found that they can make more money by renting out

the space for non-maritime events. Making money, not promoting maritime

heritage, has defined the way the building is being used. The public

needs to insist that this building be used for maritime heritage, both

now and in the future.

Alice Winship

206-448-0707

walice1@qwest.net