Three x hundreds = more questions

For months, everything about Edmonds’ waterfront redevelopment program has been about dreaming – what could be, or should be, or might be.

Now, that’s changing.

At two public meetings attended by well over 100 people last week, architects released three potential designs for the property and backed them with financial data. The financial figures suggested developers could spend between $250 – 400 million on the 20-acre redevelopment project and millions more on public amenities.

Still, the property owners urged restraint.

“At this point, these are still concepts,” said Chris Keuss, director at the Port of Edmonds, and a spokesperson for the property owner group. “There is nothing written in stone.”

But, the designs are written quite clearly nonetheless, and it is highly likely the some features from the Oct. 4 designs will be incorporated in the final project.

The community will know soon, officials said.

By an Oct. 25 public meeting, property owners – the Port of Edmonds, the McNaughton Group and developer Al Dykes – hope to choose a preferred design alternative. In 2008, they plan to bring that option to City Council as part of a request to rewrite a development rule book. Currently, buildings cannot rise taller than 35-feet.

The shortest of the economically feasible designs, Concept A, included five story buildings which would be 55-feet tall. The tallest economically feasible design, Concept C, included buildings 85-feet tall.

Increased heights allow the developers to be more flexible, and build in more attractive features into the project, officials said.

For instance, Concept A was nearly 84 percent condos, but that percentage fell to 69 percent in Concept C. Also, the value of the public amenities rose from under $3 million to nearly $5 million from Concept A to Concept C.

Proposed public space also increases dramatically across the concepts — from about one-third of one acre in Concept A to three acres in Concept C.

“We hope that (these spaces and amenities) will help reenergize our downtown core,” Keuss said.

Two other designs were also released, but not backed by clear financial data – one that complied with current codes, and one that included buildings rising 105-feet tall. Despite the lack of financial data, both of those plans could be built, said Ron Thomas, a consultant for the project.

While many community members and the property owners themselves hailed the designs as positive changes for Edmonds’ waterfront, others were less sure.

Melody and Thomas Larsen are a young couple who moved into downtown Edmonds three years ago. They came from Kirkland, which lacked Edmonds’ historic feel and small-town charm.

As Melody looked at the design proposals last week, she shook her head sadly.

“See, I warned you,” she said to Thomas. “They are turning this into Kirkland.”

Height wasn’t the biggest concern, she said.

“We moved here consciously,” Melody said. “We are young. We are relatively hip. But we sought Edmonds out for its soul.”

The plans didn’t preserve that, she said. The plans were too hip and modern and current, Thomas said. And, outside of height concerns, there wasn’t much of a difference between any of the concepts, he said.

Different criticisms came from other corners.

Throughout October, Keuss will present the designs to community groups throughout city. Last week, he presented the Chamber of Commerce’s Downtown Merchants Association.

There, members criticized the lack of a link between downtown and the redevelopment site. Because people will have to walk uphill, some downtown business owners are skeptical that shoppers would go downtown without a system to the waterfront .

The business owners recommended a trolley system like what used to exist in Edmonds, or a free bicycle program, or anything that would it easy for people to travel throughout the city.

“As a downtown business owner, these plans make me wonder ‘Hmm, should I go somewhere else?’” said Colleen Bowman, who owns C’est la Vie.

The idea for a trolley system is something the property owners have supported throughout the project, said Kevin Hanchett, with the McNaughton Group.

He continues to support it, but those sorts of detail need to be worked out later, perhaps as part of the contract rezone talks.

The city is starting to increase its involvement with the redevelopment project, officials said.

One of the primary selling points for redevelopment is the idea that additional development will help the city’s tax base.

Earlier this month, the property owners released figures to Edmonds finance director Dan Clements, which will help Clements put a number on the value of the different redevelopment proposals.

Still, there are many voices speaking against any code changes.

In mid-September, the property owners opened an exhibit at the Harbor Square business park where citizens could examine project documents and leave comments. Almost every single comment that has been left has insisted that no code be changed.

The property owners are aware of the vocal resistance, Keuss said last week.

“We know about it, yes,” he said. “But, we think to get a plan that benefits the public — to get something nice, something that people will use to eat and shop and live — we need to get something more than the current code.”