Slog - Comments on Haller Lake Residents Win Court Ruling In School District Tree Fight

Comment by The Lorax

The Lorax — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:36:06 -0800

Put down your axe.

I have spoken.

Comment by Education first

Education first — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:41:32 -0800

So trees are more important than good schools?

Comment by PC

PC — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:42:36 -0800

I've heard there is another spot on the same property they can build the building on. Other than where the trees are.

Comment by Self-Hating Hipster

Self-Hating Hipster — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:32:46 -0800

COMMENT DELETED: Off-Topic/Spam

We'd rather not moderate your comments, but off-topic, gratuitously inflammatory, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate remarks may be removed, and repeat offenders may be banned from commenting. We never censor comments based on ideology. Thanks to all who add to the conversation on Slog.

Comment by honeyspider

honeyspider — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:39:28 -0800

@2, This is a false choice. It takes decades, if not centuries for a tree to grow to maturity, and there are very few of them left in Seattle. It takes minutes to cut them down and only a matter of months to build a new building. If there was no other way to accommodate the necessary expansion on that property or anywhere else in the vast Seattle School District you could make that Trees v.s. Children argument, but that is not the case.

There are plenty of other ways to accommodate the expansion. The school should be required to put together a next best scenario, i.e. what would they do if they could not cut the trees. If the next best thing is overwhelmingly more expensive, then they can come back and make the case, but right now they haven't even given other options due diligence.

We can have both schools and trees if we are willing to put a little bit of effort into trying.

Comment by laterite

laterite — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:44:51 -0800

The best idea would be to raze the current building and build a new one in its place, saving both trees and students' dignity.

Comment by Andy

Andy — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:36:48 -0800

I'm tree-ambivalent, but I enjoy seeing them getting this injunction since the school board seems to have been a bunch of dicks dropping out the city permitting process.

Comment by Bob

Bob — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:01:03 -0800

Does anything in this city ever actually get done? Jesus. I think the school district should seize the nearest Save our Trees person's house through emminent domain and build the school expansion there. Dumbass NIMBY bastards.

Comment by The Real Lorax

The Real Lorax — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:56:41 -0800

Cut the fricking trees now. NIMBYs.

Comment by Jesus Tree Lover

Jesus Tree Lover — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:29:14 -0800

reduce the footprint of the new school - two story?? - save trees, get the space you need

in the area schools seem to be one story sprawl, why is that so suburban concept the norm??

saving these trees is a good part of new energy to become more tree friendly over the whole city - walk not just talk

re name the school - "TREE GROVE"

Comment by Kelo was robbed

Kelo was robbed — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:15:48 -0800

Bob,

The School District has other alternatives. If the courts ultimately don't agree they'll have their way in pretty short order.

Hmmm...what did I forget?

Oh yeah.

FU.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:46:49 -0800

The city tried to do an end run around the neighbors and got burned by an injunction. I have here the world's tiniest violin, playing "My Heart Bleeds for You."