Settlement gives Everett the OK for shoreline-development plan

By Christopher Schwarzen
Times Snohomish County Bureau

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

EVERETT — City leaders and environmentalists have reached agreement on how to develop about 25 miles of shoreline after a two-year dispute over proposed land designations and policies.

The Washington Environmental Council and the Everett Shorelines Coalition announced the settlement yesterday, about two years after filing suit with the state's Growth Management Hearings Board. The settlement, which will allow Everett to proceed with its shoreline master plan, was filed yesterday with the state Court of Appeals. Signers included the city, the two plaintiffs and the state Department of Ecology, whose approval of the shoreline plan is ultimately required.

Topping the dispute was whether to allow development of about 300 acres of city-owned property known as the Marshlands, between the Snohomish River and Larimer Road.

The city purchased the land, now partly used for farming, in the late 1990s, initially floating plans to develop it into recreational fields, considered in short supply in Everett.

But environmentalists believed the city was missing a greater opportunity to restore the property to its original state of prime wildlife and fish habitat.

Similar concerns were raised over shoreline use of private property at Smith and North Spencer islands, at the northwestern tip of the city.

Under the settlement, the city agreed to conduct restoration studies on the Marshlands before any development would be allowed. On Smith and North Spencer islands, where the land was used for industrial projects, environmentalists will have opportunities to educate private-property owners on potential restoration projects.

"The idea of allowing harm to happen to [areas like the Marshlands] in 2004 was seen as a pretty major loss, especially given the real value of that part of North Puget Sound for things like salmon recovery," said Tom Geiger, a spokesman for the Washington Environmental Council, which helped create the original shoreline-master-plan law in the 1970s.

The Washington Environmental Council was helping update the state's guidelines for shoreline master plans when Everett updated its plan, Geiger said. Hoping to include some of the new ideas into the city's planning, the environmental group challenged a number of policies contained in the city document.

Also questioning how to use shoreline property were smaller groups like the Pilchuck Audubon Society, the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County and 1000 Friends of Washington.
 
"We formed the Everett Shorelines Coalition basically to appeal the city's plan," said spokeswoman Peggy Toepel. "We wanted to pursue stronger protection."

While most parts of the plan drew little criticism, including larger shoreline development for the Boeing Pier and Bastyr University projects, the hot-button issue became the Marshlands, Toepel said.

"Any park facilities would be subject to getting washed out periodically by floods," Toepel said. "And the other aspect was that the land was historically perforated with side channels for the river, providing fish and wildlife habitat."

After a slightly disappointing decision from the state's Growth Management Hearings Board, the city and plaintiffs filed suit in the Court of Appeals. All parties, including the Department of Ecology, spent the past 12 months hammering out a settlement giving each organization more control over an outcome than the court process could provide.

"We're in a much better place today in perspective to the trust we've developed," Everett Mayor Ray Stephanson said yesterday. "We have development and economic growth and are still protecting the environment."

The next step is to take the modified shoreline plan back to the public for comment, which is expected to occur in the next several months, said Dave Koenig, the city's long-range-planning manager.

Then the plan will be sent back to Ecology for approval. But with Ecology already signing off on the settlement, there's little concern things would again be brought to a standstill, Koenig said.

"We're hoping that approval will come as soon as we submit the documents," he said.

Christopher Schwarzen: 425-783-0577 or cschwarzen@seattletimes.com