Taller buildings? Public to have say
A public/private partnership geared toward redeveloping a pivotal part of Edmonds’ waterfront will continue gathering support for potentially increasing city building heights before environmental studies begin next year.
Led by the Port of Edmonds, the partnership that wants to create a development master plan for 25 acres close to the waterfront says it must continue gauging residents’ reaction to taller buildings before presenting any rezoning plan to the city.
In addition to the Port, included in the development team are the McNaughton Group, which owns the former Skipper’s property, and ESC Associates, which owns the Edmonds Antique Mall. The property is bordered on the west by the railroad tracks, from the southern border of the Port’s Harbor Square property to Main Street, ending at Sunset Avenue/Highway 104 on the east.
Developers presented a number of options to residents during public meetings over the summer - ranging from one- and two-story buildings with lots for parking to 10-story options loaded with public amenities, including plazas and open space. Property owners say the area in question, outside the Port’s 11 acres, is highly underutilized, costing the city tourism dollars and the benefits of economic development.
The former location of Skipper’s restaurant is now empty, and the Edmonds Antique Mall property is just that - an antique mall. Included in the area are a small strip mall and some office buildings.
The Port’s property, known as Harbor Square and containing a hotel and office/retail space, will likely be unchanged, said Chris Keuss, executive director of the Port. But it’s important, he said, for the Port to work with private property owners and create a master plan for future improvements.
“We’re the largest landowner near the waterfront,” he said. “So it makes sense that [for] the largest chunk of downtown Edmonds that could be redeveloped, we’d like to see a consistent plan.”
What’s still under discussion, developers say, is the density of development on the property. Spread the development out by keeping buildings low to the ground, and there would be little room for extras.
But give the development team a chance to add density with taller buildings, and the city would gain much-wanted amenities, including bridges over the railroad tracks that cut the city off from the waterfront, they say.
Residents and city officials, however, are wary of giving anybody permission to construct taller buildings, for fear that the city’s quaint downtown feel would be lost.
Keuss, who has led the discussion, says the 10-story plan versus the single-story idea was just to show residents the trade-offs of the project at varying heights. Realistically, developers continue studying an option that would allow them to build four to six stories per building. Six stories would be about 60 to 65 feet tall, while current code for most of the area limits buildings to 35 feet.
“We’re looking at mixed-use development and envision this to be a tourist attraction that would draw people to Edmonds,” Keuss said. “Clearly, we understand that people are concerned with the building heights.”
Edmonds Mayor Gary Haakenson says developers need to do a better job of showing the city the fiscal impact of the amenities gained by increasing the current building height.
“The city is supportive of the redevelopment, but the people need to see that the amenities added with taller buildings are worth it,” he said. “I think it also would help if they [the developers] would make clear the view corridors - what it would look like from various roads.”
But anything taller than what’s allowed could change the way people view Edmonds.
“The height limit isn’t just about view blockage, but it goes toward the character of Edmonds, a small town where when you walk down the street, you don’t feel overwhelmed by tall buildings,” said City Councilwoman Deanna Dawson. “People in Edmonds want smaller-scale development, and that’s been proven not just recently but over a long period of time.”
Until the development team finalizes a plan to move forward, there’s little the city can do but wait. Assuming the development team, made up of the Port and private-property owners, agrees on a plan, environmental studies will begin in the spring. A master-plan design could be presented to the city’s planning board by late summer, with City Council consideration coming by the end of next year.
That means there’s still plenty of time for citizen input and changes, Keuss said.
“We’re going slowly through the process and feel we’re still in the middle of public comment,” he said. “The last step that all parties involved have agreed to is getting public involvement and refining a plan.”
Christopher Schwarzen: 425-745-7813 or cschwarzen@seattletimes.com