Letter to the Editor: Robin McClelland's rebuttal

To the Editor:

Robin McClelland made the following comment as part of her rebuttal to Jesse Salomon’s comments:

Most of the discussion focused on ways the City of Shoreline would be able to mitigate traffic impacts. I went to remind the commissioners that at one time a service road climbed from Point Wells to Woodway; in other words, in previous years there had been more than one way in and one way out of Point Wells. I also went on to say, that in addition to limiting traffic through mitigation, the city should seek every type of mitigation possible to provide economic, recreational, and social facilities and amenities that would benefit the city.

1) The road that climbed from Point Wells to Woodway was removed because it constantly washed out due to the spring water coming off the hill. The very same water that enticed the Native American’s to the area. Any road as proposed by Ms. McClelland would be opposed by the Woodway community so likely would never materialize.

2) No amount of mitigation in other areas of Shoreline would offset the destruction to the Richmond Beach community if the proposed BSRE development is allowed. In my opinion, the pro-development faction in Shoreline is seeing mitigation dollar signs, as is the City itself. I don’t know how much clearer the Richmond Beach community could be in opposing the project.

3) If it is true that the BSRE proposal violates the Growth Management Act the City should be fighting for us in court before any attempt is made at negotiation. Snohomish County has come under a lot of fire for its pro-development stance over the past few years that has now culminated in the closure of several Snohomish County banks and one of the largest foreclosure rates in the state.

Tracy Tallman

Edmonds