Laserfiche WebLink
233 <br /> ,lune 21,1978 <br /> of mtmBfthe cC,Lh poltraetitcelollwigti7pinfa <br /> (2) was thierdraft EIS adequate, a' <br /> (3) Mould the"final"er c1 of raft EI <br /> Did the"final.EIS the <br /> as a draft, <br /> (4) adequately explore reasonable measures to <br /> mitigate the <br /> potential s impacts,The <br /> e <br /> respect ltorth v ppeal..s the Committee's d v of s vcan vents with <br /> On January 5,1978,Boeing filed Environmental Checklist f with t <br /> he <br /> Ci his riled an a expansion °� Boe- <br /> ing <br /> e <br /> inyEveretResponsible747divsion icialtissuedpJanuary16,Declaration97E fthetCity offor a Ever- <br /> etting that a B w d for tho Significance,March 22,thearming Department uo,the C proposed project. Marca draft I Pfo <br /> the Boeing lfacilityxpaansion. City of a cola,d to 84 federal, <br /> state,rgional and cT governmental unit, andtonumber of cities, <br /> utilities, <br /> libraries,newspapers d private a ,Lions a individuals <br /> in the <br /> area including the offices o ni Puget n Council <br /> The Citspublished notice on Aprila1,1978Hin ttheE <br /> Heraldthatthe draft EI was available for public review. Everett <br /> The ERC met on April 25,198 t° he draft EIs. April.26 1978 <br /> as ed 1ts final y commentswhich included minor changes nand moday lifications to <br /> 1970 the vty <br /> thfdr f and responsestocommentsand t same received by the City <br /> following of etdraft EISen T a day t City as <br /> thenal E a adequate. pt <br /> .44 Evergre,Legal gen 6 rvnn 1ng on behalf of Snohomish: <br /> H eo 1 L 7 1 Tenants <br /> ticen�f app h i f fi °a no- Y7, <br /> 197h ev SRC <br /> n 4,h19 L y.. Mae date 1t <br /> o£ th appeal. matter gra ed b s th `it <br /> heldbyhe procedural matters ing.LlIttwas was <br /> discussEh 1 f the forthcoming the Ci hearing. at- <br /> and to <br /> e e b i appellants, Te ants Union filed members <br /> tic <br /> nape al too representatives <br /> and <br /> of apeal t E g 3 Sthe eattle rulesERC fished <br /> t appellants,hthe8cvt Eoeingband 9individuals who trequested athe same. <br /> On M 1978 C8ya hearing was conductappellants,t which,timeep <br /> stili P lien(Itwas <br /> presented by t ERC <br /> City a era <br /> hers Noagreed that the apeathe S <br /> war present nion was to be all combined timeswith dth theing tformer hearings. <br /> appeals.) All members ofnthe ERC <br /> After completion o the hearings atewhic ate testimony a documents were <br /> presented, <br /> ctand thhe Committee rties whichvberated x a heldnonpen Junee1 and e,19788. to the <br /> l docu- <br /> s the Committee feels p in this matte including <br /> those <br /> hl <br /> ted by the a pellants,t CitftEeeing and the public a appendedfhere- <br /> totas ppendix 1 s 1 through 0. In addition to these documents, <br /> received approximately eighth urs of testimony o May 30 <br /> and Committee 197meg..° theCommittee thoroughly reviewed all matters <br /> submitted t°them during their deliberations June1 and 2,1978. <br /> ee herewith a thisreport o e date hereof o the c <br /> ciltvt op s(leas Appendix 1)h v been fp provided to Everreen Legal <br /> vi the aR on ibnep0£iciaalt the Actingt City Attorney, <br /> , <br /> attlanreguestedoElnegsa andix lbfmmade available£the pa ublic wCity ho cCouncil office <br /> for inspection and/or copying by a thepublicwith <br /> appropriate measures to maintain its in q ty es or <br />