Now Reading
Commentary: A comprehensive approach to environmental restoration and protection will be ensured by the Parks Plan Review
[vc_row thb_full_width=”true” thb_row_padding=”true” thb_column_padding=”true” css=”.vc_custom_1608290870297{background-color: #ffffff !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_empty_space height=”20px”][thb_postcarousel style=”style3″ navigation=”true” infinite=”” source=”size:6|post_type:post”][vc_empty_space height=”20px”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Commentary: A comprehensive approach to environmental restoration and protection will be ensured by the Parks Plan Review

Commentary: Parks plan review will ensure comprehensive approach to environmental restoration, protection
Diane Buckshnis

I’ve received hundreds upon hundreds of emails and comments regarding the six-year PROS Plan update. I value all feedback and have met with many citizens to exchange emails.

I have had the pleasure of being elected to office and was able to support and be endorsed by our environmental community. I’ve met scientists, tribe leaders, other elected officials, stormwater experts, agency specialists, and professionals in all aspects that help restore/cure our environment to save our salmon, and, by extension, our whales.

Let’s look at the plan in terms of watershed and environmental perspectives. I believe that integrated plans can lead to improvements that are beneficial for both the environment and the public. It’s something I’ve seen through grant requests I’ve read over the past seven year while serving on the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council. I can give examples.

I would like to see this plan reflect our environmental community values for preserving our environment and improving it. The survey did NOT address salmon recovery, watershed issues, or honoring tribal treaty right to restore our Sound. The survey results will not be affected by the addition of these environmental goals or action plans. They are intended to enhance outdoor recreation opportunities for all citizens in the city.

Remember that funding is not only important, but also environmental issues, such as salmon recovery, culvert replacements, and watersheds solutions. This is why comprehensive plans, goals, and action items are required for the 2016 plan.

We all know that the city administration does not have the resources and staffing to do everything. Therefore, the plan must prioritize critical actions. This should include land acquisitions and routine maintenance. It should also include possible holistic projects and grant resources. Comprehensive and pragmatic plans will show grant funding agencies that we can design and/or implement.

Sometimes identifying an issue publicly can lead to resolution/restoration assistance by utilizing our volunteering community with little or no cost to the city. One great example is the creation/restoration the Marina Beach off-leash dog park. This area was where a small group of volunteers worked together to remove tons and debris. The parks manager oversees the work. Or the most recent Washington State Department of Transportation/citizen project that allowed the removal of wire fences and invasive plants on both sides of the Hwy 104 culverts to free the stream flow into the Edmonds Marsh. The Tree Board was instrumental in working with staff to celebrate Earth Day and Arbor Day. Many volunteers from Student Saving Salmon and Youth Commission, local businesses, chamber volunteers, and many others enjoy these events. It is important to recognize the importance of volunteering in order to promote diversity and inclusion.

Restoration of the Edmonds Marsh, which is an example of essential watershed planning was a high priority for the 2016 plan. Now that stormwater has been removed from the marsh and it is under parks, the PROS Plan should contain steps for a comprehensive restoration strategy that includes outdoor recreation and education as well as wildlife and estuary conservation.

The comprehensive planning approach must incorporate an environmental lens for the near shore estuary vision. This includes marsh, wildlife sanctuary, old Unocal property, Marina Beach, and marsh. It can be combined as a complete system and opens the door for a variety federal and state grant opportunities to help cover most of the restoration or land purchase costs.

For this reason, I lobbied to disapprove the two Marina Beach grants as the project would have cost the city $4 million with only $1 million in grant funds — or only 20% of the project was grant funded. With all the grant requests that I have reviewed over the years, generally grants represent 85% – 100% of the project. These grant applications also failed to include the design of a tidal channel connecting the Sound to the marsh, thus the salmon recovery aspect. It was financially inadvisable to restore Marina Beach Park without a holistic approach.

The restoration plan for the marsh should include things like nature trails, salmon watching stations, bird watching, and the recreational aspect that is already present in Marina Beach. There are millions of salmon recovery dollars. This park would extend the wildlife sanctuary onto the Unocal property, and tie in the Marina Beach recreational area with the new viewing bridge and tidal channel. This ecological restoration project could create an urban park for future generations, wildlife, and people. The educational possibilities are endless.

The array of grant programs that are available through salmon recovery programs and near-shore estuary program grants will make it easy for local taxpayers to bear the cost. Funds will also be available to fund other areas in the city that are in dire need of new neighborhood parks.

My years of experience as a member of the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council or the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council and reviewing acquisition and restoration grants have taught me that if the PROS Plan has well-thought out environmental goals and actions, the city should not have any difficulty obtaining the necessary grant funds and assistance. This plan should also reduce the burden on city resources (since funds were saved in previous years).

As a way to address PROS Plan concerns, I suggested that the process be used when finalizing the Urban Forest Management Program. A small task force was created to address insufficient content and provide specific action items for some goals and objectives. Many are willing to help to bring this updated plan closer to the 2016 PROS Plan update.

— By Diane Buckshnis, Edmonds City Council

View Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.