A vocal and animated crowd of South End residents-some donning elaborate hats built from Styrofoam containers-packed city council chambers Thursday to protest the proposed construction of a $70-million waste transfer station in Georgetown.
The June 7 meeting, presided over by council member Richard Conlin, provided a public forum for Georgetown-area residents to voice their concerns about Seattle Public Utility's (SPU) plan to build an intermodal transfer station on South Corgiat Drive.
City officials, including Mayor Greg Nickels and SPU director Chuck Clarke, claim that Seattle's existing transfer stations are 40 years old and can no longer meet the city's solid waste needs. They are ecologically outdated, prone to breakdown, overcrowded and inconveniently located, according to SPU's Web page.
The vast majority of individuals testifying at the Thursday meeting argued that the only alternative to building a third waste station rests in the city adopting a "zero waste" policy-in short, eradicating the so-called waste stream through a combination of recycling, reuse and the elimination of such non-organic products as plastic bags and foam to-go containers.
According to Georgetown resident Joel Ancowitz, who along with Kathy Nyland has spearheaded the "no third station" campaign, the concept of zero waste is that "when you're done with something, there's nothing left... it's either biodegradable or recyclable." Because nothing is going into the landfill, Ancowitz continued, the need for a third transfer station is completely eliminated.
"That became the thrust of our argument," he said, adding that rejecting the idea of a transfer station in Georgetown is hardly a NIMBY issue. "It became a not-in-anyone's-backyard issue," Ancowitz said. "Seattle doesn't need a third waste transfer station."
The proposed 16-acre site essentially would serve as a way station, with trucks from all over the region offloading waste to be compacted and shipped out daily by train to landfills in eastern Washington. The station would operate around the clock, seven days a week, and-unlike the city's two existing waste sites-would not receive trash dropped off directly by the public.
At issue, according to opponents of the plan, is the potential impact an around-the-clock waste operation would have on the surrounding neighborhood, in terms of traffic, property values, pollution, as well as the less concrete issues involving quality of life. It is estimated that the affected area could see as many as 600 truck trips a day as garbage is delivered to the site, along with the mile-long train of compacted waste that will daily leave the site for its trip over the Cascades.
Residents at the meeting appeared organized and well-prepared: along with the Styrofoam hats, a number of people were wearing forest green T-shirts upon which were printed the phrase "Trash Talk: Yes to zero waste. No to building a third station." Among the grassroots groups represented at the hearing were the non-profit ecological watch group People for Puget Sound, the Sierra Club, Foam Free Seattle and B.Y.O.B. (Bring Your Own Bag), an organization calling for the banning of plastic grocery bags by the year 2008.
Along with Conlin, council members Sally Clark, Jean Godden, David Della and Nick Licata also heard public testimony of the city's waste policy.
Conlin called the meeting one of several chances to "rethink" current waste disposal management, adding that the city "should be aiming for a zero-waste strategy.
"It's up to us to choose whether we're going to do better," Conlin told those in attendance.
Most of the people stepping up to the microphone (Conlin, noting the informal nature of the hearing, urged speakers to limit themselves to two minutes, give or take) stuck to a few recurring themes, hammering home the necessities of recycling and reuse in stemming the flow of the city's waste stream. A number of speakers carried with them large plastic trashbags, stuffed to bursting with yet more plastic bags, as symbols of the enormous amount of non-biodegradable products consumers have come to rely on.
Speaking as a member of B.Y.O.B., South End resident Dan Lundquist urged policymakers to implement a mandatory charge for plastic grocery bag at retail outlets. "With a shift of habit we can avert millions of bags, and millions of dollars, from being wasted," Lundquist said.
Another speaker, commenting on Georgetown's growing reputation as a haven for "mavericks" in the city's arts scene, said that the area could serve as a model for the rest of the region. "We represent the last vestige of Seattle's pioneer spirit," he said, adding that it's unfortunate that many of the city's unwanted byproducts "all follow Georgetown home."
Other speakers noted that Seattle's 1989 solid waste plan, which called for a recycling rate of 60 percent for all of the city's solid waste, doesn't go far enough. One woman even sang her comments, putting the lyrics "Waste will subside" to the tune of Gloria Gaynor's 1978 disco hit, "I Will Survive."
Kathy Nyland, likening the city's waste management policies to a medical condition, called for an "alternative" cure for that which ails. "Our management of waste is ill," Nyland said, "and we need to treat it differently. There are many options available that will get us to our goal of 60 percent [recycling] and beyond," she added.
Ancowitz said on Sunday that he felt the meeting provided a huge boost in the fight against a third transfer station. "I definitely feel like we made an impact," he said, adding that the opposition movement has been facilitated by a city council "that was open minded and listened to us."
The same, however, can't be said for either the mayor or the folks at SPU, Ancowitz said. "All along they've been so disingenuous with the way they've handled their public outreach," he said of SPU. For instance, Ancowitz pointed out, SPU at first said that some 200 trucks would be delivering waste to the Corgiat site on a daily basis. It wasn't until pressed further that SPU revealed that those trucks would be making up to three deliveries a day. "It just started to raise flags in the eyes of Georgetown and in the eyes of the community council," he said of such alleged half-truths.
Nonetheless, Ancowitz said he's found the community support for the no-waste movement "really inspiring and really encouraging." And, he added, the issues at hand extend well beyond the siting of a single, albeit significant, transfer station in Georgetown; with scientists ringing the alarm about the planetary impact of global warming, Ancowitz said the zero waste movement should have reverberations far beyond Corgiat.
"We started to really view it as an opportunity to examine how Seattle handles its garbage," he said, adding that the city's pushing for a third station is a regression from the area's "green" status. "It's kind of embarrassing right now," Ancowitz said. "People are going to look back and say, 'Why didn't they do something?'"
Despite what he considers a successful public hearing on Thursday, Ancowitz said the battle to install a no waste policy far from over. "Until it is in writing and made public that the thing is dead," he said of the intermodal transfer station, "we don't consider it dead. We consider it to be dying, but it is not dead."
"Georgetown is geared up for the next public hearing," he added, which will take place June 28 at the Georgetown Ballroom.
For more information on Seattle Public Utilities proposed intermodal waste transfer site on South Corgiat Drive, visit SPU's Web site at www.seattle.gov/util. To contact the Seattle City Council or to find out more about upcoming public meetings, visit the city's Web site on-line at www.cityofseattle.gov/council.
Associate editor Rick Levin can be reached at mageditor@nw-link.com.[[In-content Ad]]
