Sandy beach or overwater pier? City officials differ in their visions for change.

The city may cover a bit of nature to protect it.

Plans for Waterfront Park improvements include terraced platforms aimed at protecting tree roots and over-water boardwalks to draw beach strollers off the park’s narrow stretch of shore.

“This park’s in an area that’s rapidly urbanizing,” said Winslow Tomorrow Project Manager Sandy Fischer, who is leading efforts to revamp the downtown park’s master plan.

“In an urban park, you want to have some protection so resources are not over-run.”

But some environmental specialists say the city must tread carefully as it considers the use of man-made structures to preserve naturally occuring features like trees and fish habitat.

“Over-water structures definitely have impacts,” said city shorelines planner Peter Namtvedt Best.

Docks and boardwalks can hamper the growth of eelgrass, which provides important habitat for young salmon, he said.

Best is leading efforts to remove bulkheads along the park’s shore and return the beach to a more natural state. With imported gravel and driftwood, Best predicts the beach could become more inviting to both people and fish.

“It’d basically be a sandy beach that’s walkable and it would return to its historically natural condition,” he said. “So it’s a win-win situation.”

Best doubts high foot traffic would significantly harm the beach’s value as a fish spawning area, where eggs would intermix with gravel.

“There’s no reason in my mind to restrict use on the beach,” Best said. “I see nothing but benefit.”

But Best’s plan to replace bulkheads with gently sloping tideland would erase the park’s waterfront trail, Fischer said. The over-water boardwalk was proposed partly in response to Best’s plan, which would likely mean the loss of some existing trails or their relocation further upland.

“Peter would like to pull the trail up through the treeline,” Fischer said. “But we need a trail at the edge or over the water because that’s what people want.”

Initial sketches of the park plan showed the boardwalk spanning much of park’s shore east of the city dock. But that proposal, Fischer learned later, would likely violate the city’s shoreline regulations.

Instead, the city is exploring a boardwalk site closer to the dock, even though that plan could impede harbor views, Fischer said.

Fischer is trying to balance the desires of recreational park users with concerns for the area’s environmental health as she orchestrates the park’s redevelopment. The park’s draft plan includes a new bathroom facility, an expanded city dock, dinghy moorage, a performance area and other amenities.

Island residents see the park’s primary purpose as a public meeting place, according to Fischer’s interpretation of a recent online poll of 65 participants.

“Environmental stewardship” was identified as the number two priority in the city-sponsored survey, Fischer said. The results, she added, largely match goals and priorities expressed in workshops and other discussions about the park’s future.

“We need to look at this holistically,” she said. “It is perhaps possible that we can accommodate people and the fish.”

Best agreed, stressing that consideration of design and location could lessen many of the boardwalk’s environmental impacts.

Metal grating, glass bricks or other transparent walking surfaces can allow some sunlight to enrich aquatic plants and animals under the boardwalk, Best said. The materials, locations and number of support pilings are also key considerations, he added.

Thoughtful building practices may also alleviate some concerns about the health of park trees.

While praising Fischer’s plan to build terraced platforms from the park’s upper slope to the waterfront, island plant pathologist Olaf Ribeiro cautioned that poor design can lead to even bigger problems.

“I really do like the idea,” Ribeiro said. “It can protect the roots from compaction and it can keep people on the path and away from plants.”

But built without the proper care for the trees, platforms can cut off water and nutrients or channel too much water to certain trees.

“It has got to have a pretty good design because (platforms) can starve some trees and drown others,” he said.

Ribiero also expressed concerns about earlier plans he said included the removal of about 100 trees from the park.

That idea’s been scrapped, Fischer said. She stressed that her design aims to keep existing trees. Only about 16 alders and a few holly trees, considered an invasive species, are scheduled to get the ax.

“If the trees are determined to be healthy, we’ll work around them,” she said. “In our design, we’re really trying to protect trees, the steep banks and the water’s edge.”

***************

Park values

The city’s online opinion survey of the Waterfront Park master plan received over 60 responses. Key results include:

• Strong support for prioritizing the park’s use for water-related recreation, community gatherings and environmental stewardship. Less support was expressed for programmed educational uses and non-water related recreation.

• A strong call for a basic bathroom. While the need for toilets ranked very high, other proposed uses for the bathroom facility ranked very low, including showers and storage space.

• Most respondents do not want the bathroom to be the central feature of the park and would strongly prefer its location near the children’s play area.

• In the northernmost portion of the park, respondents strongly favor an expanded senior center but expressed little support for community gardens.

• In the southeast portion, respondents strongly favor a trail link to the ferry terminal but greatly disliked a new vehicle bridge over the ravine estuary.

• Respondents were sharply divided on whether to retain the park’s tennis courts.

• Facilities for boating, including an expanded city dock, dinghy moorages and storage for rowing shells, garnered strong support.