1988/08/17 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

31C August 17,1988 impacts. On June 2. 1988, Judge Daniel T. Kershner issued a memorandum Decision which upheld the city's interpretation of state and local SEPA rules and policies regarding the analysis of cumulative traffic impacts. klb;reheA=refiocm'n'tni717p::erWeadverssgglg;i:erkendisn= above. L In the appeal, Bradford Cattle stated that the court case regarding cumulative traffic impact analysis is currently pending and has not been finalized. He stated: The cumulative traffic impact issues raised by William Brost apply equally to the convenience store. In the event the court were to ultimately make a determination that further traffic study is required or further mitigation is appropriate for the intersection, it is very probable that the same issues and determinations would be applicable to the impacts generated by the convenience store project on the intersection of 41st and Colby. Because the determination of the Snohomish County tupaslar court is not yet final,and the time periods for reconsideration and/or appeal have been exhausted, the issuance of the Determination of Non Significance for the convenience store under SUP 949-88 is MrueniilThtaherenrVilrf:1:Sju"dInc-alirn"r"g:V1:2 s of William Brust with respect to the Weaver Development project, which such claims have equal applicability to the project under consideration in SEPA No.49-88. IC. Mr. Cattle requested in the letter of appeal that the DNS be iimanded to the Responsible Official to await a determination by the court on the appeal of William Crust, including the completion of any time periods for reconsideration or appeal of the Superior Court determination or further action by the court. II. The City Traffic Engineer reviewed the Circle K proposal and 1 required several conditions to mitigate traffic impacts, including elimination of two driveways and the granting of an easement to the city for street purposes for the right turn lane at the 41st and Colby intersection. He concluded that with these conditions, the project would not have a significant adverse impact. 12. The city has reviewed the traffic impacts of the Circle K 5Foposal using the same interpretation of SEPA rules and policies as ill the Weaver shopping center proposal. The SEPA policy related to cumulative imp..stet... A single development or lend use though otherwise consistent with zoning and other city policies may create adverse impacts upon facilities and services,natural systems or the :Ce surrounding area when aggregated with the impacts of prior or Other proposed development. It is the policy of the city to analyze such cumulative environmental impacts and conditions or deny proposals to minimize or prevent adVerse impacts In accordance with other provisions of this ordinance.