Submitted by Claudia Riiff Finseth.
Last week the Tacoma News Tribune carried some interesting articles related to the Hearing Examiner meetings that had just wrapped up on the proposed use of the Spanaway Marsh for a high-density development. The plan is for a tiny home village for people experiencing chronic homelessness at the end of their lives. Opposing sides have grown up, and the issue has become heated, resulting in lawsuits.
In one rather sensationalist article, reporter Cameron Sheppard compared the controversy over the use of the Marsh to a battle between people and squirrels, as in who is the most important, anyway?
In another, more salient article, former Washington State Republican Party chairman, Chris Vance, wrote about the mess Pierce County has made of land use planning in general, and implementation of the Growth Management Act in particular, compared to King County.
I’d like to take a moment to try to get to the real heart of this matter by comparing the “expert testimonies” by the biologists who were the wetland specialists for the hearings, one for the building applicants, and one for the appellants who oppose the use of the Marsh for high density development.
The whole thing centers around Category I and Category II wetlands as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. Which is the Spanaway Marsh?
The biologist for the building applicant says it is a Category II wetland, and so high-density development is permit-able there. That biologist’s reasoning was that there is evidence of human activity on the land: specifically some trash, signs of camping, and signs of walking.
But most of these reasons are due to trespassing behavior, not-owner activity. There has been little to no owner activity since white settlers arrived a century and a half ago. For instance, there has been no fill dumped on the site, and no building of dikes or industrial activity as on the Puyallup River. There is no toxic pollution on the site like the Tacoma Smelter spread over large swaths of Tacoma’s North End. No signs of toxic spills or toxic uses of any size.
In Contrast, the biologist for the appellants, Dr. Sarah Spear Cooke, Past President of the Northwest Chapter of the Society of Wetland Scientists, wrote this conclusion to her appraisal of the Marsh:
“This site, situated adjacent to a major wetland complex (Spanaway Lake / Wetland) and within two large high quality wetlands (A and B), is unsuitable for any development, because the construction and continued use of the property as a tiny house village with many active residents would cause an adverse impact to the wetlands and surrounding oak forest ecosystem for numerous reasons (detailed below) and further, the mitigation proposed would be highly inadequate to compensate for the clearly foreseeable and devastating impacts.”
How will the Hearing Examiner rule? We should know by the end of this week.
This multimillion dollar plan isn’t about compassion for less fortunate people. It is an illogical self serving political marketing ploy to remove unsafe and unhealthful homeless squalor out of Tacoma and Lakewood. It is a gold plated plan to conceal the inhumane situation our “leaders” allowed in the first place and have enabled with tax payer resources ever since. The swamp is just an out of sight location to dispose their problem. The proponents keep changing the purpose of their now agricultural/convention center in the hope some plan will stick.
In what world does the current plan to move “people experiencing chronic homelessness at the end of their lives” to an out of the way swamp make any sense?
drsmythe,
Yes, that’s what I think, too. Thank you for saying it so well.
Best,
Claudia
WELL DONE CLAUDIA and an on-the-money response drsmythe!!!!
By the way, my wording to the good doc was especially chosen because that’s the tuther side of this preposterous governmental episode.
I am still having a hard time understanding why the Lakewood City Council donated $1-million of Lakewood citizens money without asking us first.
Actually….I am having a really hard time understanding what any of our state’s so-called governing bodies are doing.
Maybe I need to move to another state.
I SINCERELY HOPE the hearing examiner makes the RIGHT decision.
Eric,
I hope you will stay here in Washington State and help us make government responsive to its citizens again, instead of imposing on them. Let’s turn out the vote in November, and make this happen.
Best,
Claudia
This whole plan is wrong on so many levels it is actually disgusting! The lies, corruption, back door deals and the fact that Pierce County TRM and Lakewood are exploiting the very people they propose to help! I too want to leave Washington state! I’m sick of all the taxes that have been dumped on the working class. The greed in this state is beyond ridiculous! The wetlands need to be protected. The fall out from the massive amounts of dirt, concrete and asphalt they will have to bring in will be astronomical! They are not prepared for this at all. I am praying hard that the hearing examiner makes the right decision.
Was the cute squirrel picture supposed to sell more newspapers than a photo of the pristine wetlands? The big issue is the wetlands coupled with the Garry Oakes and old growth forest. If this piece of property is destroyed by human abuse, it can’t just be repaired. A quote from the EIS study that was done for the Cross Base Highway over 20 years ago! Appendix K page 20 about the Ober property, which is now Tacoma Rescue Mission’s “Village” property. “The Ober property has about 40 aces of a relatively mature (approximately 100-year-old-) Douglas-fir forest….Few comparable stands of similar-sized trees are found in the urbanized areas of the southern Puget Trough.” These trees are now about 120 years old and would be cut down for this project where they chose THE WRONG LOCATION! To help stop this madness donate to https://spanawayconcernedcitizens.com/
Thank you, Sherry, you are so right: what we are asking for is basic quality of life stuff. Why is that so hard to understand? I think the people who represent us are out of touch with us.
Best,
Claudia
Hard to know about the squirrel article, isn’t it, Lyn? It stymies me, when so many other reasons were given for protecting the Marsh. Thank you for including the donation website in your comment.
Best,
Claudia
Thank you Claudia for standing up for our community when so many of us don’t know the right words to say! Our community needs to stick together and let our government officials this type of behavior is uncalled for by voting them out next election. Spanaway is not a dumping ground to put tiny homes on wetlands that will contaminate our aquifer and our precious Spanaway Lake. To think these government officials are stupid enough or obviously don’t care about the facts this proposed tiny village is next to JBLM where there is constant noise impacting those with ptsd especially.
I truly hope our Hearings Examiner makes the right decision to stop this project now and that our county officials will start listening to the community in which they serve instead of pockets of big money! I don’t want to leave my home in Spanaway, I also don’t want to live in a polluted area! Thank you!
Thank you, Sherry, you are so right: what we are asking for is basic quality of life stuff. Why is that so hard to understand? I think the people who represent us are out of touch with us.
Best,
Claudia
Sherry, I don’t think our elected government officials are stupid. I think they are lazy and self serving. It is pretty well documented that most of the homeless are either addicted to substances and/or suffering from mental illnesses. The rest are mostly nerdowells and scofflaws. Addressing addictions and mental illness isn’t as big a vote getter as are flashy “freebies”. And heaven forbid should we enforce laws protecting law abiding citizens and public property. That is on us; the voting public.
The proposed project site sits on a parcel that is officially recognized as a biodiversity area, and which Pierce County itself designated as high priority to be kept as open space.
It remains a mystery why the compulsion to destroy this site, which is so ecologically significant. It is a sad commentary on the state of our society that our authorities show an utter disregard for the environment, biodiversity, nature and wildlife — even endangered wildlife.
I hope that the Hearing Examiner sees the many extremely serious problems with this proposal (not only limited to environmental concerns!) and makes the right decision.
And then as was suggested above — we have to make a concerted effort to elect candidates in the autumn who will finally put the environment first.
If the environment is destroyed — nothing else matters. Not even housing for the homeless, or making a buck on real estate speculation. Vote for the Earth.
Thank you, Christina. It seems we almost have an anti-environment government right now in Pierce County, doesn’t it?
Thank you for staying up on and writing about this important topic. There is various issues with the project. The articles I have seen are directly avoiding some of the main issues including water quality issues and categorization of the wetlands. Thank you for bringing light to this.
Yes, I don’t know why it is so hard to get a reporter-written article that speaks to the entire truth of the matter. Has the Tacoma News Tribune become anti-environment, too?
Claudia, I agree that their stating a bit of trash made it grade 2 wetlands. Anyone that’s walked in the past would say it is totally natural. I think it was classified class 1 in the cross base highway EIS. And nothing has changed since then. The result should be at least requiring an EIS.
at least an EIS.
Thank you, Claudia, for highlighting the complexity of this matter. While some journalists and local politicians attempt to simplify it as merely about endangered squirrels and disgruntled landowners, the reality is far more intricate. The comparison between the expert testimonies presented by both sides provides a clear indication of the complexity and significance of this issue.
The biologist for the building applicant’s argument that the Spanaway Marsh qualifies as a Category II wetland based on evidence of human activity is unconvincing. This human activity primarily stems from trespassing, not from any substantial owner-driven development or industrial use. In contrast, Dr. Sarah Spear Cooke’s detailed analysis highlights the ecological importance of the marsh and the severe environmental risks posed by the proposed development.
Moreover, Chris Vance’s critique of Pierce County’s land use planning and the implementation of the Growth Management Act underscores the systemic problems that have contributed to this contentious situation. The county’s lack of effective planning and management has led to unnecessary conflicts and potential environmental degradation.
This controversy exemplifies the need for more responsible and forward-thinking leadership in land use decisions. It is essential that city leaders take into account the expert assessments that stress the ecological significance of the Spanaway Marsh and the potential adverse impacts of development. The decision by the Hearing Examiner should prioritize environmental preservation and sustainable development practices.
In summary, I agree with Claudia’s insightful analysis and urge city leaders to take a more careful and environmentally conscious approach to land use planning. The Spanaway Marsh is a valuable natural resource, and its protection should be a paramount concern in any development decisions.
Thank you for enlarging on what I am trying to say, T.
Thanks Claudia for keeping the ball rolling. There are so many concerns about this location. I’m very concerned also about a forest fire in there. When you have drug addicts who may not want to smoke their pipes in their homes, but would rather wander into the woods to enjoy, there’s a high chance of a fire starting. There will only be one road into the area, so not only will it be a challenge for our firefighters, but how do you evacuate all these people at the same time. Most of these people, according to TRM, will be handicapped in one way or another. They plan to have a couple of golf carts for transporting the residents. Please explain to me how well that’s going to work with 300 plus people in an emergency situation.
Thank you, Marion, for the concerns you bring up. The last few years our vegetation and trees have been tinder dry by midsummer. The Marsh is not a place for people to live.
Dr. Sarah Cooke’s closing comment was if Spanaway marsh isn’t a category 1 wetland then there are no category 1 wetlands anywhere. The Counties and the applicants attempt to “game” the system is deplorable. They also cleared back all the vegetation near Wasmund Road that has grown for decades and graded the pavement to try and support their claim that Wasmund Road is a significant roadway. With a locked gate at one end and concrete barricades at the other the most traffic the road gets is from wildlife. Thank you for your article.
Thank you for sharing Dr. Cooke’s closing comment, Dan. It really encapsulates the whole thing, doesn’t it?
The Spanaway Marsh remains untouched because it sits mostly on federal land, away from county land misuse practices. The wetlands located near the proposed village should be rated category #1, rather than the category #2. The county’s attempt to avoid a environmental impact statement is telling. Good land use is everyone’s responsibility.