Monday, October 13, 2014

Aunt Alicia (Olyblogosphere for October 13, 2014)

1. Alicia Elliott will save Olympia.

New investment opportunity. Threaten development of something, raise the hackles of your neighbors, Alicia Elliott will buy you out. Its the modern Olympia Aunt Sally.

2. Support Zinefest!

3. The best Olympia blog ever reads my mind. What if! What IF!!!!!

4. Yeah, big surprise here. Every place in the world is more nuanced than it seems at first.

If you came here from New York, Austin and then Portland and moved to Olympia "because you liked its look" and then were disappointed.

You deserve that disappointment. It isn't our fault. Grow up.

5. I don't mind the debate on the LBA Woods. Let's debate parks! I'm against spending money on it now. And, I actually like the proposal for development (because it was better than the straight up burbs that had been built in that area).

But, this is annoying:
LBA Woods are a true gem--an old-fashioned Commons of sorts in that the property is privately owned, though it is neither gated nor posted with no-trespassing signs or welcome signs.
Because it isn't even true:
...the developer (D.R. Horton, a nationwide company headquartered in Delaware) has chosen to fence users of LBA Park out of the trails.
We can debate whether it should become a park, but the owner wants you to stay off their property. That's their right man.


TVDinner said...

GAH. This LBA Woods business drives me batty. Parks is facing something like a $153 million backlog of deferred maintenance. THERE IS NOWHERE NEAR ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY FOR WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. Spending money on this quixotic, pro-sprawl proposal is insane, if not for economic reasons then definitely for ecological ones.

Developing these parcels is the only ecologically-sound choice, because infill development prevents sprawl at our fringes. We can't prevent growth; the Growth Management Act has legislated that already. What matters is how we manage our growth. The LBA proposal smacks of entitled people who have theirs, but they want to make sure no one else gets a piece of it.



Emmett said...

Yup. You're right. Nail/head.

Anonymous said...

Emmett, I'm surprised at you! You clearly didn't read all the way through the blog post describing, yes, this gem of a place. A real place! In another post you complained that everyone was stuck in their cars every time they needed a jug of milk or whatever. Maybe that's what is the matter: get out of your car and get to the Woods! You'll find your neighbors walking their dogs, riding bikes, visiting and just soaking in the nature-scape. Kids build forts here and play. Adults find respite and social connection. Do we have to pave over every square foot? Where will we all go when every bit of Olympia is "developed" one of the uglier terms in modern parlance. Take a break, go for a walk. Let the place get under your skin a little and you won't find the idea of saving this LAST BIG SPACE so strange. In fact, you'll wonder at the insanity of cheek by jowl housing that leaves room for nobody to breathe! All the best to you.

Anonymous said...

Have you ever heard of Nature Deficit Disorder? Read Richard Louv on the subject and you just might begin to understand why many, many Olympians want to save LBA Woods. We want a community that has places of refuge from the over-built environment. I know the Growth Management argument: "We need to pave over this forest to save other forests, for the thousands who are coming to this area." What forests will we ever save given that logic? Do you think those incomers will thank us for saving nothing at all? What about the health and happiness of those who live here NOW?