ENA President's Message
This upcoming ENA meeting should be one worth attending. We will have a representative from the Port of Bellingham come and present the Port’s vision of the New Whatcom waterfront. There will be a 30 min or so presentation and then a Q & A session. Also Lairmont Manor owner Joel Douglas will present his future plans for the extended property and the possibility of a re-zone to accommodate adult multi residential housing. A short Q & A will follow his presentation. In addition to the presentations, there will be an abbreviated ENA business session, updates on Chuckanut Ridge and the CMPD. This meeting has all the makings to be a good one.
I encourage everyone to attend the October meeting. The meeting is on October 2nd, 7:00 PM at the Firhaven Park Pavilion.
Thank You, Brad Rose
Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Committee
The Mayors Neighborhood Advisory Commission met on the 10th of September at City Hall. Topics that were discussed:
1. There are openings on the city’s Design Review Board for a lay position and on the Historic Preservation Commission. Contact Marylyn Vogel (mvogel@cob.org, 778-8300) if you are interested.
2. Citizens Forum – There was a presentation by Donna Auer regarding the newly formed Citizens Forum. This forum is intended to share ideas about growth and provide an open dialog to exchange ideas and find creative answers to growth issues. Anyone interested can contact either Donna Auer or Joe Yaver.
3. Neighborhood Plans/Tool Kit. It was announced that Neighborhood Plan update work will not get done this year – effectively putting on hold the Neighborhood Plan Update process that was set in motion a couple of years ago. The new Neighborhood “Tool-Kit” definition amendment to the comprehensive plan was discussed. MNAC questioned the rush and since the meeting, the city has postponed the process to give more time to review what actually will be included. Time will be put aside during an up an coming MNAC meeting to review and discuss this form a neighborhood perspective.
4. Waterfront Planning Update – Sati Mookherjee got MNAC up to speed on where the city and the port are on the water front development. There will be plenty of opportunity to examine the plans and comment on them in the near future.
If anyone in Edgemoor has an issue that they would like brought up before the MNAC, please feel free to contact me. This commission is our neighborhood’s opportunity to communicate neighborhood issues directly with the executive branch of the city government. So please forward you issues.
To view this month’s Neighborhood News bulletin go to: http://www.cob.org/news/neighborhoods.aspx
Thank You
Brad Rose
MNAC, Edgemoor
Coalition of Southside Neighborhoods
At the request of the CSN, a letter was drafted by ENA President, Brad Rose:
Tim Stewart
Planning & Community Development Director
City of Bellingham
210 Lottie Street
Bellingham, WA 98225
Re: Fairhaven Highlands EIS schedule
Mr. Stewart,
The Edgemoor Neighborhood Association feels that the updated Fairhaven Highlands EIS schedule released by the Planning Department on August 21 does not provide adequate time for the Neighborhoods that would be directly affected by this proposed development to properly review the Draft EIS and provide educated comments before the public comment meeting.
According to the schedule, the Draft EIS is to be published on January 5, 2009 with the public comment meeting to follow only 22 days later (January 27, 2009). According to WAC 197-11-455(6), the lead agency is required to provide a 30-day comment period form the date the Draft EIS is issued. Additionally the lead agency may grant a 15 day extension upon request.
This letter is to officially request on behalf of the Edgemoor Neighborhood Association that the public comment period be extended to the full 45 days and that the public comment meeting is held at or near the end of that period – regardless of the actual date that the Draft EIS is published.
During our discussions about Fairhaven Highlands, you stated that the only chance for the public to comment on this controversial development proposal is during the Draft EIS comment period. Since this is the case and due to the size and scope of this proposed development’s EIS, we feel in fairness, that the comment period should be extended to the maximum allowable length.
We know you understand the concerns our neighborhood has about this proposed development and hope that you can provide us the full opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS findings.
Thank You
Brad Rose, President
Edgemoor Neighborhood Association
Fairhaven Neighbors
Hello
Fairhaven Neighbors and Friends,
This Wednesday is the first Wednesday in October and our regular meeting
night. The Bylaws Committee has presented their draft revision (you can see
it on our website www.fairhavenneighbors.org)
and Wednesday, we will vote to amend and accept. Parliamentarian Ann
McCartney will assist us in conducting the vote, section by section, and
then on the final document. The process should be pretty interesting, even
for something as dry as a bylaws.
I hope everyone can come, so that we have the best possible quorum.
Again, at Fairhaven Park Pavilion, at the top of Chuckanut Drive, from 7 to
9 pm. We'll have refreshments and hope all Fairhaven stakeholders can
attend.
Vince Biciunas, President
CMPD Update
Dear Friends of the Chuckanut Mountains Park District,
As you may know, the court hearing in Skagit County on September 12th was decided against our request for intervention. We no longer have a petition. The court settlement of the 25th of August signed by Judge Cook stands. Without a petition we have no position with the Boundary Review Boards.
Briefly the decision was based on what was considered to be an inconsistency between the front page of the petition describing the southern boundary as the Bow Hill Road and the legal description on the back detailing the sections starting at the intersection of the Bow Hill Road and I-5. When Frank Eventoff met with the GSI official in the Skagit Auditor's office, it was explained that the meandering Bow Hill Road, legally described, would have filled a full legal page.
Why they could not use the midline of the Bow Hill Road as they did with I-5 was never explained to us. Drawing the boundary in a straight line was preferred by the auditor personnel and a straight line would be sufficiently short to fit with the Whatcom legal description in the available space on the back page. Had we briefly qualified the Bow Hill Road on the front page, that might have sufficed. (We did reference the legal description on the front or sign-up page.) We did not realize that the legal description did not follow the Bow Hill Road until a couple of months ago. Our attempts to get a county section map to delineate the legal description were unsuccessful.
The court decision on the 12th also faulted us for not filing an intervention. Our claims that we counted on the County Prosecutors to defend the auditors' acceptance of our petition was dismissed and the prosecutors said that they would have appreciated support in that regard and had suggested prior to the settlement signed by Judge Cook that we file (intervene). Had we done so we might have known about the filing of the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe lawsuit on March 6th and the North Sound Conservancy lawsuit, originally filed in September and amended in May when the NSC realized that challenging the signatures was not working. Even had we filed an intervention, there is no assurance that we could have convinced the judge that the minor southern boundary description differences were inconsequential, which they were. Had we known and been able to convince the Skagit Boundary Review Board to correct the differences, we might have prevailed. You may recall that the Skagit BRB was not interested in functioning as a Boundary Review Board, but just as a political tool for the Skagit Commissioners and the vocal North Sound Conservancy.
This is a very over-simplified explanation of some of what we have encountered over the past two and one half years. If there are questions, we would welcome an opportunity to expand or explain in response.
We will be attempting to contact community groups for direction as we did in the past. On the table is a consideration of reforming into two districts and cutting off the districts at the county line. The Chuckanuts still need protecting and any input you have regarding our future would be appreciated. Please call Bob Gibb at 733-5775.
Joanne Peterson - for the CMPD Advisory Committee
