After the Feb. 4 city of Kent “conversation” about what to do with proceeds from the sale of Pine Tree Park at Pine Tree Elementary, I left with more questions and concerns.
First, the city did not notify residents of the park sale, admitting “they have learned from their mistake” and that “they would do better next time.”
City officials intended to use the sale of the proceeds of this park to upgrade other parks as late as late as Monday (Feb. 1).
Citizens pointed out language protecting this green space, which states the city can trade for property of like or greater parks and recreation value or open space value as set forward by King County approved Forward Thrust Bond measure.
In an about-face on Feb. 4, the city said they were looking at “acquiring” land to add to other parks but had “no specific plans” to date. None of the possible land acquisitions they mentioned were close to this community park, and that they were working closely with King County officials.
The city provided copies of the “Parks Sustainability” report from a City Council workshop dated Sept. 15, 2015, at this meeting. This report contains 2011 Park Asset Maps.
Comparing 2011 with 2015 city of Kent’s Parks and Facility Guide, a number of parks have been scrubbed off the 2011 park map, including Pine Tree and another park close by. Officials said they identified these parks a long time ago and shrugged off the changes.
I see no record of zoning or planning applications or public notice to change the dedication of these parks on the city’s hearing examiner document archive going back to 2007.
Is this allowed?
Is it possible these changes make it far easier when a land developer asks for an environmental impact study? It seems logical an environmental study would be assessed differently, moving from a dedicated park open space for over 40 years to a residential plat slated for 64 homes.
These comprehensive land use changes have now been approved by King County and sits before the state Legislature for final approval.
We can write our mayor, councilmembers, King County executive and state legislatures to look into this now. King County has to sign off on this park land purchase. The state has not yet finalized this version of the comprehensive land use map. The city of Kent is scrambling to get this plat finalized and refuses to revoke this purchase and sale agreement, saying it has been signed, and that they believe they broke no laws.
I wonder if the city has tired negotiating with this land developer to agree to revoke this offer.
It seems a do-over is in everyone’s best interest. Perhaps then the city could provide a format where residents had some input how to replace their lost dedicated open space. Perhaps then our faith in transparency in city government would improve, and perhaps then a land developer could proceed knowing all was above board.
It is sad to think it will take hiring attorneys to have someone at the city hear our concerns and take our pleas seriously. I wish it wasn’t so. But I know we cannot stop until the ink has dried one way or another, and, for what it’s worth, this park is not in my neighborhood, but who knows what park will be next.
– S.A. Lynden
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website https://www.kentreporter.com/submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
