Ideas for Seattle

Please stop this from happening! Our neighborhood has enough traffic, noise and litter. We do not want any more. Sell this land to the highest bidder and build some high-end real estate, so we will have new neighbors, not lights, traffic, drugs and thugs.There are enough community centers, and whoever imagines this "sick" building can be ameliorated and fixed up enough to have children safely in it again, or can pay the insurance and upkeep can't have run the numbers. Even artists lofts there would be such a neighborhood amenity. But NO to community center!

As a mother of three kids in the neighborhood, 8, 5, and 3 years old, and living on a block w/ 14 kids total under the age of 9, I can say I am tired of always having to hop in the car to take my kids, or neighbors kids to a park on the weekends. Tim, if you survey the neighborhood, you would find most kids are under the age of 9, and most of us would have sent our kids to the school, but it was closed and wasn't even an option. And to the person who said it couldn't possibly take an hour to walk to Montlake. Have you ever done it with an 8, 5 and 3 year old? When our only car broke down last summer, we were forced to walk/bike to and from the parks, school, and sports practices at Madrona, Montlake, Garfield and Miller field. It takes exactly 45 minutes to RIDE BIKEs w/ a 5year old and 8 year old from Montlake to our home near the Valley School. And walking uphill to the other parks is difficult for little kids, they can't ride their bikes up or downhill, so it's frustrating for them, not to mention a painful minimum half an hour of whining. Anyway, it's interesting that the Garfield and Montlake community centers are not surround by private elementary schools such as our neighborhood.

Bart, get real, it does not take 1hr to walk to any of the community centers. The farthest is 2miles(montlake) with no hills. Anne, Madrona k-8 is about half a mile from mlk, money from the sale could help that school get up to performance standards.
John, all the proposals have community access, and it will be part of covenant when ssale/lease is done by school dist. Tobias, the building will not be publicly owned no matter who gets it, and the sps already said they will not open a school there, mlk is too small building and land..when is was open enrollment was falling thats why it closed, it also was one of the worst performing in the district.
I don't really care who gets it, but most of the supporters of community center are really stretching the truth, and many just outright lies regarding the other bids.

Can't say enough good things about the CCC@MLK proposal. I am mystified at folks who think the one-time cash benefit to the District outweighs the long-term value of the land; there are ZERO guarantees that a private institution like Bush would actually provide access to area residents.

But it's not about Bush. Ultimately this is about many of the topics already raised - what kind of City are we? One that values walking and community, providing services close to people live while helping decrease greenhouse gas emissions from long-distance trips? Or one that thinks short-term fingers-in-the-dike School Board profit outweighs the long-term benefit of keeping the space for the community? Madison Valley has the commercial strip on Madison, but there are no community spaces within walking distance. Keeping this site for the community is the right decision.

I would like to address the issue of walkability when it pertains to the Madison Valley. While it may be true that they are several community centers within DRIVING distance of the Madison Valley, due to the steep hills of three sides of the valley all of these community centers are at least an hours' walk from most parts of Madison Valley. By contrast, the soccer field that the Bush School currently uses in the Seattle Arboreteum is no more than a 15 minute walk from the the Bush School. If Seattle ever hopes to be the Green City that it imagines itself to be, we need to encourage the support and development of walkable alternatives to driving. And while walking alone creates a more engaged community, offering a space for people to gather for arts, culture, and social interaction is the next best way to encourage neighbors to get to know each other. A community center at MLK is the best idea for building community that I have heard in years. A soccer field that is closer to the Bush School, frankly, falls a bit short of this aim.

The School Board has had MANY tough decisions in the last few years. One of those tough decisions CLOSED MLK School (despite a resurgence of school-age kids in the area and a newly successful Montessori program) so the kids of Madison Valley take buses to schools outside of our neighborhood or go to private schools. Many of us will see families split due to the reassignment plans, further spreading our community out. Here is an opportunity to let the community gather back to what was once the heart of the community. PLEASE look very carefully at the plan for MLK as a Community Center. The families of Madison Valley and Madrona need a gathering place that is by the people and for the people. Our kids need a place to climb and play, our neighbors need a chance to expand their horizons and meet another, and our community needs to dig in and help to make this happen. With property so valuable that every side yard has turned into another house, or four, there will not be another chance like this one. I respect the Bush School and their desire to grow, but not at the cost of an opportunity to serve the growth of our community.

Two things: firstly it seems like a pretty basic concept that as the city grows and densifies, existing public facilities are increasing in value and should be preserved in some form. If MLK is sold, the down-the-road cost of replacing that size of building and land plot will be ridiculous. Keeping MLK public sustains the public presence, and allows for new services in an under-served neighborhood.

Secondly, having grown up in the neighborhood, and now living not far from MLK, I want to directly contradict Central Area when s/he says that a community center would bring some sort of "gang kids" to the area. At a base level, that's a flatly ignorant (and incorrect) statement. I spent many days playing basketball on the court at MLK, and walk by regularly. Not one single solitary time in my entire life have I ever felt intimidated. On the contrary, MLK has always been a welcoming place in my mind, from going to the polls with my mother to the Spaghetti Dinner - precisely the kind of civic atmosphere that a community center would continue to provide.

This project would provide a huge array of services for an area of the city which has traditionally been neglected by the city. I have no problems with the Bush School and think they would probably be decent stewards of the space. However, a full community center would be a huge asset for the valley. The community center would provide a host of opportunities for students and adults in the northern central district as well as a community meeting space. While I respect the opinion of "central district", I must disagree, there are no community spaces nearby for non-profits or other service based organizations. Yes, Miller and Garfield exist, but there is no place for an organization to that provides day care, after school programs, adult education, or other social services to call home.
This is clearly a project that the city needs to support as it will directly impact the lives of students who cannot afford to attend schools like the Bush school and the adults in this area.

The area already has 3 community centers within a few miles of each other, and to say bush already has a soccer field is just a lie, they have a maybe 15-20yard open area with a goal, but no way a soccer field.
The schools should sell for the greatest financial gain and use mo9ney to fix the existing schools.
Do you really think bush is competing for students with sps? they do give a lot of schlorships to minority students so maybe they do , but is it not better education? I think so. Bush has been here since the 1920's, they have been great for the area. DO NOT WASTE PUBLIC MONEY ON ANOTHER COMMUNITY CENTER, WE HAVE 3 IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Let them build a playfield they will be required to let us use it.,

Another point - the explosion of private schools in Seattle came with desegregation and bussing. Now that the district is reverting to neighborhood schools and the economy is in the tank, private schools are having trouble meeting their enrollment goals. I predict the city will start to see some of the smaller ones going out of business or merging before too long. Why are we considering selling a public school asset to an organization, no matter how well meaning, that is essentially in competition for local students? Since government funding for public schools is tied to enrollment, the loss of these students drains resources for public education.

Madison Valley is in dire need of a social gathering space to create community, offer youth education and social service programming, and foster neighborhood relationships. This area has been hard hit in the last few years (floods, anyone?) and the City should prioritize this project. The City has allocated money to help convert other former schools into community centers (Phinney, U Heights) and Mayor Nichols voiced support when in office. Richard Conlin is behind this. Mayor McGinn and Seattle voters should support public use of publicly owned property (like Seattle schools).

The city needs to get behind this project. The area has plenty of private schools, including 4 within a half mile of the ML King Elementary site. Many in the neighborhood can't afford to send their kids to these schools. If the school district opts for the bigger wad of money that Bush School can pay just to knock down a cherished building and install a soccer field, it means taking another big chunk out of a neighborhood so that it is more convenient for kids from other neighborhoods to play a particular game. This neighborhood has already had 8 buildings knocked down to install a giant hole to retain water and control flooding - flooding that was caused, actually, by the city. One of the private schools nearby created great controversy by knocking down other residences in order to expand their facilities. We only just barely kept the city from knocking down another whole block of residences here because it was cheaper than actually solving the flooding problem. Is the city's solution to the needs of this neighborhood just to make it go away, a little bit at a time, so no one really notices except the people who actually live here?