Kentucky’s Redeveloped Waterfront Balances Commons and Commerce

Helen Brandt, Ph.D., is a Whatcom County writer/photographer who works in the public schools as a psychologist.

Last summer, returning from visiting Indiana and Tennessee, we wandered into a small town in western Kentucky, perched on a high bluff above a river. Henderson, Kentucky, overlooks the beautiful Ohio River as it winds through wooded bottomlands to join the Mississippi River. It’s a town of 27,000 residents across the river from a city of 121,000.

As Bellingham begins planning to reclaim its industrial waterfront, it is worth examining what a small town such as Henderson has done with its waterfront. Its achievements could be worth emulating.

The wide swath of land along the Ohio River is devoted to public uses. There are tennis courts and a tree-shaded park with benches along a winding pathway looking out to the river. A wide, paved access with adjacent free parking allows boats on trailers to be launched into the water.

A new one-story building in the style of a traditional 1901 railroad station houses the tourism commission and the historical society, with a community room connecting the two offices. All commercial activity occurs on the other side of a broad street that borders the community park. It’s convenient to walk to the businesses, but they do not intrude on the green, tree-shaded, waterfront park.

At the main entrance to the park, a fountain with changing 15-foot high water patterns is surrounded by benches. In warm weather, children run through the water and play while adults sit and watch. A toddler play area has water jets that rise to only two feet in height.

Further along the waterfront, an amphitheater seating area is set into the sloping hillside. It is the setting for a summer outdoor concert series. The audience watches performances while barges slowly navigating the river serve as a backdrop.

Last year Henderson received an additional $10 million dollars in federal funds for further riverfront improvements.

Multiple plans for the Georgia-Pacific property are being presented for public comment. Two factors underlie the current discussions of how to develop the Georgia-Pacific (G-P) waterfront. They both need to be brought to the forefront.

The first is the issue of the commons, that is, the portions of the Bellingham waterfront that belong to all of us, and for which all of us are responsible. The waters of the bay, the air above it and the land beneath are our collective responsibility.

Plans for the G-P waterfront must be measured against the long-term welfare of the commons. For example, the merits of situating a marina capable of mooring additional recreational watercraft must be weighed in relation to the overall health of the shoreline and bay ecology.

The wisdom of creating streets that would increase vehicle traffic proximate to the water should be debated. How would storm water runoff from the streets affect tidal communities? What effect will rising ocean levels have on parts of the property during high tide storm events? What are the long-term environmental consequences, meaning 75 to 100 years, of the various proposed plans?

The second issue concerns the advantages of wealth. Does our community want the G-P acreage allocated primarily for use by those with financial resources sufficient to own yachts and waterfront condominiums? Or does the community want the acreage used primarily by the majority of residents of Bellingham and Whatcom County?

An example of the former is the complex at the south end of Thomas J. Glenn spit. The Bellwether is a bay-front hotel with associated offices and shops that caters to the upscale market. The in-season rates for a room typically range from $200 to $300 per night. Before construction of the Bellwether, the land was used by the public for flying kites and for the yearly Ski to Sea carnival.

The area occupied by the Bellwether complex has a narrow strip of land on its southern and eastern perimeters that is open for public use. Its location and size do not invite people to linger. In contrast, Boulevard Park has a wide swath of waterfront used by the whole community. Which emphasis do citizens want for the Georgia-Pacific property?

Our visit to Henderson provided one example of how to reclaim a waterfront. It’s an answer that provides aesthetic and recreational uses available for everyone.

The long-term consequences of today’s decisions about the Georgia-Pacific waterfront should be reason enough to take sufficient time to deliberate all the factors before rushing ahead. §