Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lakefront Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge shuttle service and dredging to improve access to Lakefront Park
Summary
Two public commenters asked the council to prioritize shuttle service to the Lakefront Park to avoid new parking, and recommended dredging Lion Creek mouth to improve salmon passage and in‑water recreation; both speakers offered volunteer help and encouraged the city to consider low‑impact amenities rather than a large meeting building.
During public comment, two residents urged the council to prioritize access solutions for the proposed Lakefront (Waterfront) Park that would limit parking expansion and protect the shoreline.
Jack Tonkin told the council the park is roughly two acres and said creating adequate parking on site is unrealistic. He suggested the city consider a shuttle to move visitors to and from the park and recommended small, low‑impact amenities such as shower stalls and a dressing area rather than constructing a building for meetings. "Because it's small… I encourage you to drop the idea of putting a building together in such a way that it accommodates meetings," Tonkin said, and offered his assistance developing planning materials.
Resident and former planning commissioner TJ Fudge voiced support for Tonkin’s shuttle idea and criticized consultants’ outreach, saying the proposals lacked local context. Fudge also recommended dredging the mouth of Lion Creek to reduce sedimentation, which he said is the main impediment to salmon passage and to in‑water recreation at both the future Lakefront Park and the Civic Club. "The number one impediment to salmon in Lion Creek is the desolate expanse of shallow sediment at the mouth of Lion Creek," Fudge said, and described dredging as a potential win‑win for habitat and recreation.
Why it matters: the Lakefront Park project is capital‑funded in part by state support; public access, environmental protection for salmon habitat, and neighborhood impacts are central tradeoffs for project design. Both commenters asked the council to consider alternatives to on‑site parking and to prioritize sediment management as the park design advances.
What’s next: councilmembers acknowledged the comments; no formal action was taken during the meeting. Staff and council will continue project planning and coordination with state partners and WSDOT on access and safety issues.
