Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waterfront Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ridgefield residents press council for environmental review, buffers amid port waterfront plans
Summary
Residents urged Ridgefield’s City Council to protect the waterfront from dense development, calling for an early comprehensive environmental review, larger park buffers to shield wildlife and clearer public engagement after multiple speakers cited osprey nests, flood risk and survey transparency.
The Ridgefield City Council heard more than a dozen public comments May 28 urging stronger protections for the city’s waterfront and pressing the council to push the Port of Ridgefield for greater transparency and environmental review. Residents, wildlife advocates and nearby property owners asked the council to seek a full environmental impact statement, larger park acreage and genuine buffers between planned development and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
Those concerns took center stage during the public-comment period after Mayor Matt Cole issued proclamations for Great Outdoors Month and Pride Month. Nancy Fagen told the council that a hotel shown in circulated plans sits where an osprey nest is currently active and asked the city to “exercise your authority when you can to protect this beautiful area for future generations of both Osprey and us.”
The demand for early environmental review drew repeated calls. Robin Knight urged the council to require “a full environmental impact statement now at the planning stage not deferred until a development application is submitted,” citing Washington SEPA guidance and arguing that a master plan for the 40-acre site next to the refuge should trigger review before decisions harden.
Other residents flagged infrastructure and safety questions. Rick Gren circulated a petition asking for an independent community survey and noted state and federal funds spent on cleanup of the property, saying taxpayers deserve meaningful input. A speaker who said he filed a public-records request reported the port had obtained a FEMA letter of map change that would reposition land relative to the 100-year floodplain; residents warned that removal from the 100-year floodplain does not eliminate risk from larger flood events.
City staff repeatedly told speakers that the waterfront land and planning are primarily Port of Ridgefield projects but acknowledged the city can exert influence. Walt Gordon and others asked who would pay for associated road or overpass work and requested clearer timelines and public reporting of decisions and surveys — several commenters said they had filled out past surveys but never seen published results.
Advocates for accessibility also weighed in. Jane Tester Kleiner, program manager with the Lower Columbia Nature Network, urged the city to advocate for adaptive boat launches to expand access for people with disabilities and suggested multiple launches to make the waterfront a regional destination for adaptive recreation.
Council members did not take formal action on the waterfront during the meeting. The mayor and staff said they would continue to engage with the community and noted upcoming opportunities for conversation, including a council coffee chat scheduled for June 3. Several speakers said they will continue to attend meetings and press for earlier environmental review and clearer city–port coordination.
Provenance: Topic introduced in public comment starting SEG 396 (Nancy Fagen’s remarks) and continued through SEG 1275 (closing public comment items and repeated calls for an environmental impact statement).
