Why the surprise over courthouse parking?

Published 4:26 pm Monday, December 29, 2014

The Everett City Council last week essentially put a stop-work order on Snohomish County’s plans to build a new courthouse because of a lack of adequate parking, a move that reportedly surprised county officials.

The city’s new rules for downtown parking would require about 312 spaces for a building the size of the proposed courthouse, nearly nine times the 36 spots the county had included in its plans, reported Herald Writer Noah Haglund.

The $162 million building is to be built across the street from the current 1960s-era courthouse on an existing parking lot that, at least in the short-term, will eliminate 130 parking spaces.

Haglund’s report makes it clear that there were assumptions made by both the city and the county that everyone understood things were being addressed. Until they weren’t. At least one county official told Haglund he believed the city was only going to require a parking study rather than a firm number of spaces. Everett Mayor Ray Stephanson said he believed the county’s plans included significantly more parking.

“I think there has been an incredible lack of communication,” County Council President Dave Somers was quoted as saying.

We’ll second that.

With parking at a premium already in Everett’s downtown, it’s cause to wonder:

Why did the county believe 36 parking spaces would be adequate for a nine-story building used by scores of the public everyday, even if the county eventually planned to replace parking lost by building on the existing parking lot site?

Why didn’t city officials discover the problem and voice their concerns sooner?

Were county officials hoping the “parking study” was going to tell them they didn’t need to provide more parking?

The city’s interim parking rules will be in effect for a year, providing time for the city and county to negotiate how many parking spaces will be required and how to provide them. But it’s likely to delay the county’s expected construction start for the middle of next year and it’s also likely to increase the cost of the courthouse project.

Delays can be costly, particularly for construction projects. And a quicker discovery and resolution of the courthouse’s lack of parking would have saved money, time and embarrassment.

County officials, admittedly, inherited a flawed plan and process for a courthouse replacement from disgraced former County Executive Aaron Reardon. But the lack of communication and the comfort level with assumptions among city and county officials falls squarely on all currently involved.