Editor:

Over the last six months, I can’t think of anyone with whom I’ve spoken — with a few exceptions, of course — who is for the Port of Edmonds’ proposed Harbor Square’s redevelopment. But what has been made clear to me in almost every conversation that I’ve had with exceptions, again —  is that nobody really wants 358 new condos downtown or a 55-foot building height.

However, I think I’ve painted myself into the corner by being negative in my previous writings. It is true that I am against the Port’s proposed redevelopment of Harbor Square. It’s been presented to the public via the Port’s brochure, which was mailed to everyone earlier this year, which promotes a Mixed Use Transit Oriented Development.

So let me make myself clear; I am for the redevelopment of Harbor Square. It desperately needs to be redeveloped.

A few days before their July 25th meeting, the Planning Board posted their agenda on its website. The Port of Edmonds was scheduled to give a presentation and make a request to amend the City’s Comprehensive plan for a contract re-zone allowing an increase in building heights to 55 feet.

Along with the agenda, the Planning Board also posted documents about the process of amending the City’s Comprehensive plan, the Port’s pre-requisite documents for the proposed Harbor Square redevelopment along with the request for the needed Comp Plan changes and the Port’s power point slide show.
Four citizens’ letters to the Board are posted along with the agenda.

The letter written by Jack Faris is the letter that caught my attention. He suggests several concepts that could greatly benefit the citizens and the City of Edmonds:
…. a little bit of give with regard to building heights – with strict limits, of course  –  can open up possibilities for broad community benefits, including marsh restoration, improved  storm water management, and special new public spaces

The Master Plan provides for exploration of a public space component that could be funded through private donations from individuals and foundations.  During the course of the development of the Master Plan, a number of Edmonds residents have participated in discussions of what such a component could be, such as:
– A multi-purpose meeting space and gathering place that is comfortable and enhanced by inspiring surroundings, including windows to the marsh.
– An educational facility with hands-on state-of-the-art learning technologies for K-12 students to explore science first hand and to have access to fascinating insights into the maritime industries.
– An architectural feature that is exceptional both in its aesthetic values and its expression of green values.
– A destination and/or turnaround point for waterfront walkers.

I would like to add to that list a suggestion of my own, which was inspired, oddly enough, by attending the Port’s meeting on March 26.

The approved minutes of that meeting reports that, during the COMMISSIONER’S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS, Commissioner Orvis, said “…the Alliance (Edmonds Alliance for Snohomish County – ed.) discussed that Snohomish County has benefited from Boeing for many years without any effort, but this is no longer a sure thing.  At this time, the aerospace industry is importing workers because the state is not training enough new workers to meet the demand”.

In my personal notes I indicate that somebody quipped (the quip was redacted from the approved minutes) that a training center in Edmonds could be a good idea. I also wrote in the margins that such a training center could be an excellent concept for the Harbor Square redevelopment.

To me at least, this idea makes a lot of sense. Harbor Square has a hotel on site, the athletic club, easy walk to restaurants and virtually next to the Amtrak station. Company trainers and designers could come, stay a few days and exchange their ideas with colleagues and/or students to expand their employment potential.

Plus, a training/development facility doesn’t have to be 55-feet high.

Since the Port’s March 26th meeting, it was reported on the radio, that Airbus (Boeing’s main competitor) is proposing to build an assembly facility in the Seattle area.  Governor Gregoir gave a sound bite stating that she is fully in favor of such a proposal and is willing to help make it happen.

Whether or not Airbus will actually build a plant in the Pacific Northwest, while a logical choice, is unknown. But, should that occur, I think the possibilities are exciting.  So, why not have a place where aerospace technology — or any other technology for that matter — can be taught and developed.

As I write this, I find myself thinking that the process of civic change, regardless of how glacially slow it is, is kind of exciting.

Thank you, Port of Edmonds, for inspiring me to become involved in the process.

Eric Livingston
Edmonds