By Tim Kowols
With an appeal of the Department of Natural Resources’ Ordinary High Water Mark ruling possible, the Waterfront Redevelopment Authority opted to discuss the broad principles they would like to see from any new development on the site during their Wednesday afternoon meeting. City attorney Randy Nesbitt told the WRA that the ruling released by the DNR earlier this week had not yet been legally vetted nor had city officials had a chance to read through it completely to make any recommendations. Nesbitt also stated possible appeals to the ruling by the city, WRA, or others could add a possible two years to the dispute. Members had their own questions about the original compromise line from the lawsuit against the city, with John Asher asking city officials for maps clarifying what the site could be used for in the future.
Even though the WRA agreed it was too early to make recommendations, Vice-Chairperson David Ward outlined some key points he would like to see kept in mind during discussions for redevelopment strategies in the coming meetings, with finances being among the most important.
Attaching a cost ceiling to the city’s investment in the site, aesthetics, and public involvement were other principles brought up during the discussion. The WRA went into closed session to consider a financial investment into the granary building.