I’m writing in response to Chris Fyall’s article: “Council Considers ‘Code Compliant’ Waterfront.” At the Nov. 20 council meeting, to which Fyall refers, several citizens requested that money be allocated to explore an alternative plan for the Waterfront. We asked the council to back further citizen involvement because the plans developed by LMN architects ignored the input of citizens, including members of the CG33 group which was created for just that purpose.
Citizens’ reaction to 5-6 stories of mixed-use buildings was overwhelmingly negative, many asking that no code be changed.
Fourteen thousand dollars of Edmonds citizens’ money and $72,000 of Port of Edmonds citizens’ money has already been allocated to develop what has been called the “refined” plan for an urban village.
Chris Fyall’s article reported: “It is problematic for cities to design projects on private property that might eventually be used in development applications, he (city attorney Scott Snyder) said.” And: “Because Edmonds can get involved doesn’t necessarily mean Edmonds will, Mayor Gary Haakenson said.” Mayor Haakenson was also quoted as saying: “I just do not believe that our place is to design their project for them.”
These statements are confusing and require clarification. Because over $100,000 of public funds ($86,000, plus many hours of staff time) went towards designing the “refined” plan for the private and public properties on the waterfront, Edmonds is already involved.
The final design on the waterfront will affect Edmonds for generations to come. It behooves all of us, citizens, property owners and elected officials, to continue to work together on this project.
You can read and comment on this, and other articles about the waterfront, on www.edmondsforum.com.
Joan Bloom
Edmonds
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
