1983/10/20 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

..... „ 401 October 20,1,82 , .• • soN,:HEREEORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Evrett th t: ".'.,::v7=ragret7leltYwrtthh'eOsellet:s'lld t)::1;:t1"'ed"'f"s'"a' . . , Roll was called with all Councilmen voting yes,except Councilman . Michelson,who voted no. ' Motion Carried , PUBLIC SEARING-SW DRAINAGE PLAN-(CH 8210-437) DEC Mathias,of the Public Works Department,review.the past history of tbe drainage plane.starting in June of Igor when a coneultant agreement had been approved by the City Cooncil. In . March of 1982,draft plans and executive summaries were circulated 1 and in April a draft EIS was circulated. July 1st,1,82,.e final 1 EIS was issued a.on September 14rn the Basins Plans were approved 1 by the Planning Commission. He said the drainage pl.encompasses about POO acres of S.N.Everett. He said there ore.5 steps prior to the resolution before the Council adopting the plan. These were: 1)to identify the drainage problems: 2)to iderstify future problems; 3)to establish objectives in each drainage baein; 4)to identify preliminary alternatives to achieve . the objectives; and 5)to select and recommend alternatives in each-drainage basin. . • : After the preparation of the resolution,the citirens committee h. • recommended that the following words be added to number 3 at the • very end of the paragraph: "and a plan update every 5 years". They felt the plan should be updated at least every 5 Years. . Councilman Gipnon asked whet would be used as a measure in these 5-year updates'and Mr.Mathias replied that this plan would allow the . City to determine wheth.these developers should be required to keep • the drainage problem on their own property,whether it would impact the streams,adjacent proPertY,etc. . Darrel Freudenberg,of 4937 Seabreere Nay,objected to the drainage p7on. He felt in his area of Powder Well Gulch there should be a , 60"pipe to take the water down. He said the stream goes from 6 , Rd inches to 4 reek when the rains come. He present.a petition with 1 50 signatures stating they were against adoption of the pending S.W. d Everett sewage Plan because it mould permit construction of major . : developments without the addition of protective storm sewers and rneld , were for adoption of an alternative pl.which would require con- ) struction of storm sewers finanCed by those developers who caused the major impact. He objected to bolding Po.,..FinG.b....c.b.b. Os overflooded within a short time with a heavy rainstorm. os Clair°livers,of the Engineering Department,said the plan had ProPoeed several alternatives for Powder Mill Gulch and the committee .• . dd had determined that detention ponds were the most coot-effective Rd solution. . . C.unoilman Stephenson suggested greater enforeement should be looked , into for both business and residential developments causing these drainage problems and Mayor Moore replied that when the Boeing CoMpaoY I • d...-