Really Seattle Schools? You are Really Suing the City?

Topline

Seattle Schools is suing the City of Seattle and four Alki residents because SPS lost an appeal on having zero parking spaces for the renovation of Alki Elementary.

Story

When I was in Seattle and I attended the "well-resourced school" meeting at Nathan Hale High School, I met candidate, Maryanne Wood, who is running for school board to fill the vacating seat of Director Leslie Harris. We exchanged phone numbers and I interviewed her this morning. (I'll have a separate post on her candidacy but I found her thoughtful and engaging.) 

As you may recall from this post, Ms. Wood is one of four Alki residents who had appealed several zoning departures in the rebuild of Alki Elementary School in West Seattle. The City Hearing Examiner came back with just one upholding of the appeal but it's a key one - the total lack of any parking. That bounced the appeal back to the City to review again. The district was not pleased.

To note, the City code requires 48 spaces for the size of what SPS is building. All the other elementary schools in West Seattle have at least 30 spaces. There is City parking of about 27 spaces close-by but that's not always going to be available to school users. 

In my interview with Ms. Wood, I found out that Seattle Schools is suing the four residents for making the appeal AND the City of Seattle. From the West Seattle Blog: (bold mine)

After three weeks, Seattle Public Schools has made its decision about how to respond to the city Hearing Examiner ruling granting neighbors’ appeal of a zoning exception that would allow the new Alki Elementary to be built without off-street parking: It’s going to court. That’s one of the options if you lose a case before the Hearing Examiner – going to King County Superior Court with a “petition seeking review of a land-use decision.” That’s what SPS filed today, according to documents we obtained tonight.

The district contends that the Examiner's conclusion was wrong: (bold mine)

Petitioner is aggrieved and adversely affected by the Decision because the Decision prejudices Petitioner’s ability to use its Property and is intended to interfere with the Petitioner’s legal use and enjoyment of the Property and the ability to develop the Project … the Examiner engaged in unlawful procedure, erroneously interpreted the law, made a decision that is not supported by substantial evidence, and committed clear error where it concluded that the Appellants met their burden to demonstrate that it is not necessary to eliminate all parking to meet the school’s educational needs. … The Decision’s determination that the parking analysis did not accurately reflect parking conditions was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. … The Examiner chose to give greater weight to anecdotal statements that parking conditions in December 2021 must not reflect normal parking conditions instead of expert analysis that concluded, in both the report and in testimony, that the parking conditions in December 2021 were likely higher than normal conditions given that many people chose to stay home (and park on the street) rather than leave due to both the COVID-19 pandemic and the West Seattle Bridge closure.

I'm unclear on why the district is suing the four residents; are citizens not allowed to challenge these kinds of public spending/building projects on zoning issues? 

As Woods and the West Seattle Blog point out, this won't end quickly. There could be a hearing as soon as October 20th but the case could drag on for months and months. The district has completed most of the demolition but with this decision to sue, they cannot continue on to building. 

Naturally, the district won't be using in-house Legal but likely hired outside lawyers. This comes at a huge cost at a time when they are running a deficit.

One burning question SPS didn't renovate the Schmitz Park Elementary building which is very large site that was gifted to SPS for public education use and certainly could have handled the parking. The district has consistently refused to explain their thinking on why Alki versus Schmitz Park.

And the comments at the West Seattle Blog:

Somebody explain to me why Seattle Public Schools is being so tone deaf to the will of the community. I could understand this from a belligerent commercial property developer or such. But schools are all about community and fitting in. This fight is going to add a year or more to the rebuilding schedule and a huge amount to the cost — and leave a tremendous residue of ill will. 

The biggest head scratcher is why SPS didn’t build their super-sized school on the gigantic Lafayette property and consolidate the two schools there.

 

Believe it or not, the ‘community’ includes people who disagree with you. It’s not SPS delaying this project or adding costs, it’s the handful of people who care more about their parking than school children who are adding cost and delay. Even if SPS didn’t challenge the ruling, there would be significant delay as they redesign the whole thing to include parking and go through the whole permitting process a second time. 

 

 This is a common theme; why are people arguing over cars? 

Better to use limited land for uses that support education such as classrooms or play space, not for storage of people’s private property. 

 

What about the citizens who also pay for the school that want to see a less car-dependent city? I’m glad to see SPS challenging this.

 

Holy cow!  Complaining about added classrooms for students, because it displaced 30 cars might be the best example I’ve ever seen of putting cars before people.

 

But let’s be realistic. It’s more than people just saying “cars are bad, build less parking”. The topography of Seattle makes it almost impossible. The hills and rough terrain make walking and biking unrealistic for most, and particularly for busy parents that have a lot on their plates. The layout of the neighborhoods to the primary employment centers also doesn’t align with the ability to not use cars.

 

Yes, the staff will be parking all over the place nearby so that people that purchased their houses can’t even park where they live. It’s ridiculous and arrogant of the school district.Maybe they should’ve went taller and left the parking?  Either way you can’t disrespect the people that live there. It needs to be a balance. That’s why we have legal process is to work this out… but planning anything with the zero parking spaces is insane and disrespectful.

 

Yeah but this will add likely a year to the rebuild timeline and that’s only if they win. That’s another year of the kids at an alternate site. How does that help anyone? No this feels more about pride. A reasonable solution would be to negotiate with the neighbors on some reasonable number between 0-48. Why must everything be all or nothing. Compromise would be a skill to show those students.

 

And SPS provides METRO passes ONLY for those who work at the John Sanford Center, not for staff in schools. 

 

Nice to see SPS continuing a great Seattle tradition of making every project take twice as long, cost five times as much, annoying everyone most directly impacted, and dying on every last ideological hill within sight. 

 

I have voted for every school levy for the last 40 years. I believe it is time to start voting no and defund what appears to be a bunch of spoiled children who are in charge of our schools – They easily could have built a new school at the old Schmitz Park site and paid for it by selling the land at Alki.

 

The school does not need a parking lot. The dumb thing is thinking that the school needs to have almost twice its current capacity in a neighborhood where no young families can afford to settle in and those that do send their kids to private school.