Magnuson Park has a feeling of openness that's heightened by a majestic view of the Cascade Mountains on a clear day. It is here, on the former Naval station where Seattle Parks and Recreation is planning to build a large, lighted sports complex. This decision, still in its formative legislative stage, gave birth to an opposition citizens' group called the Friends of Magnuson Park.
On Feb. 2, the front meeting room of the University Unitarian Church held a crowd of more than 200 people who gathered for more than two hours to hear Friends of Magnuson Park and city representatives speak about the status of the sports complex plan.
"We have before us a very important and very complicated issue," stressed moderator William Anderson, a University of Washington Law School professor, before he introduced Kim Wells, president of Friends of Magnuson Park.
The plan
Wells began with brief descriptions of what the park is like now compared to what it will look like in the future, if the sports complex is built.
If the city's plan goes through as it is currently proposed, Wells said, 153 acres of the park will be bulldozed and developed, including current wetland areas. She said the project is scheduled to take 10 years to complete, with five phases of construction.
Four years ago, Wells said, the city pegged the cost estimate at more than $60 million for construction only, and she noted the city currently has $12 million dedicated to the project.
Wells feels the park's combination undeveloped public land nestled on a peninsula is unique. She pointed out that of the park's 352 acres, more than 100 comprise wildlife habitat ranging from savannah grasslands to wetlands.
Wells noted that the Seattle Audubon Society has documented 170 bird species in Magnuson Park, including the threatened willow flycatcher, rufous hummingbird and bald eagle.
Wells also said that 21.6 acres of playing surface already exists in the park.
According to Seattle Parks and Recreation records, the City Council recommended, in March 2001, a sports complex configuration of 14 fields for Magnuson Park. Ten of the fields will cover the area on and surrounding the existing Sand Point Fields. All of these will feature lighting and synthetic-turf surfaces.
The remaining four fields will be situated on the existing Magnuson Fields, which is also called the Sports Meadow. These final four will not have lighting and will feature natural grass.
To adequately illuminate so many fields, Wells said each requires 40 to 65 lights, burning at 1,000 watts apiece, and together these 400 to 650 high-powered lights will hang from 80 poles alternating from 75 to 85 feet high.
Wells ended her presentation with a quote by Seattle City Attorney Bryan Glynn, who said, in response to the city's Magnuson Park sports complex plan, "Even the most obtuse decision-maker will know that light pollution is the major byproduct of this decision."
The wild things
"Really what we're talking about is how do we take care of the quality of life in our city.... [The City Council] needs to take our time to carefully look into this thing," Councilmember David Della said to an applauding audience.
Della chairs the Parks, Neighborhoods and Education Committee. It is through this committee that the Magnuson Park sports complex legislation will pass.
Della encouraged public input and said that he and his colleagues on the committee will have their own public hearing on the matter, as well as do an on-site tour of the park. This promise had the audience clapping and cheering.
"I am open to looking at all sides of this issue," Della asserted, vowing that all public input to his committee will be heard before yielding the floor. "Once we make a decision it has to be a well-informed one."
With this in mind, wildlife biologist Kate Stenberg took the microphone and spoke to the audience about the impacts this field construction will have on the area's critters.
Stenberg noted that, along with the diversity of bird species documented in Magnuson Park, there are many different kinds of rodents, amphibians and mammals - from mice to coyotes - living on the peninsula.
She said the reason for the park being able to support such a diversity of wildlife is because of the many habitats there. Stenberg pointed out that the Magnuson area contains lakeshore habitat, wetlands, seasonal wetlands, forest glens and upland habitats.
"A lot of our native species need more than one habitat type. [To survive] they need them connected," Stenberg said. "A conversion to a sports field is a permanent conversion. It's just as permanent as paving it or putting a building on it. Sports fields are not habitat. Forty-three percent of the park will be lost due to [the sports complex] impacts."
When referencing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Stenberg told the audience the city's plan to convert upland and seasonal wetland areas into playing fields and open water wetlands promises to adversely affect the native species living there.
Additionally, the nonnative and invasive bullfrog population would benefit from such changes, as would Canada geese.
Because of factors like these - in addition to the increased human noise, traffic and light - Stenberg stressed that the impact on the park wildlife will be even greater than what is revealed in the EIS.
"Wildlife is really important to people. There are studies out there that show that contact with the natural world is important to children's development, just as much as sports are," Stenberg said to a hefty round of applause.
The effect of light
Emphasizing the adverse environmental impacts of the plan was lighting designer and illuminating engineer James Benya, who is working pro bono with the Friends of Magnuson Park to help decipher the sometimes-complicated scientific language of the city's EIS for the Magnuson sports complex project.
Benya stated the glow of the lights reflecting off the synthetic playing fields into the night sky would be 10 to 20 times brighter than the parking lot of a regional shopping mall.
Benya also noted that the eastern shore of Lake Washington will not be visible when the lights are on, and a stargazer looking into the sky from Magnuson Park will lose "two magnitudes of stars."
"The sky glow is going to be able to be seen for miles and miles and miles," Benya said in a matter-of-fact tone. "The EIS understated the impact."
Despite this, Benya was quick to compliment the architects and engineers who put together the lighting design in the city's proposal. He noted the completed plans were laid out accurately and professionally.
"This is a hard one," Benya concluded. "It's going to create a lot of light. You seldom see so many sports fields in a complex lighted at once."
Legislating a change
"This is a political issue," Anderson said. "Now and then, there'll be an interest that doesn't get to speak.... If somebody is going to speak for the children and for protecting their heritage, it's us. We have to speak for the children."
Immediately, Della and fellow councilmember Peter Steinbrueck's legislative aide Stephanie Pure were asked why the project is necessary in the first place and what its status is in the legislative process.
In response to a 12-year-old child in the audience who asked why the city would need a lighted field for kids' sports, Pure said, "You really don't. For the most part this [sports complex] is to accommodate a lot of adult soccer."
Pure then asserted that the city has not and, therefore, must complete a needs assessment for the area's field sports while also taking an inventory of the fields currently available within the area that are being underutilized for sports.
This statement drew a room-filling applause, which she followed up by noting that, "There is a need for passive use. [Steinbrueck] has been very responsive to this issue."
When asked about the plan's status, Della informed the audience the proposal must first pass through his committee, where there will be an opportunity for it to be shaped before facing the possibility of becoming law.
"It seems to me we put things in parks just because they're there," City Councilmember Jean Godden added toward the meeting's end. "Why put such an intense use in the middle of our passive park? We need recreation... but I think we don't need to do it in our places of solitude."
[[In-content Ad]]
