Laserfiche WebLink
236 <br /> June.:,1989 <br /> tleley iyilsoitemlfarbtweope,Pa onded by Councilmember Overstreet to <br /> Roll was called with allwcouncilmembers voting yes. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> PUBLIC HERRING-PAINE FIELD IND.PARK APPEALS <br /> Gary Doughty of the Planning Department saida revised Mitigated� <br />^ Determination of Non-Significance was issued on <br /> 2 <br /> May aa <br /> proposed 300,000 square foot warehouse in southwest Everett. The <br /> project name is Paine Field Industrial Park, Phase III and the <br /> applicant is Berkley Engineering& <br /> Const.(Saber Corp-) <br /> Four appeals of the administrative decision were received.on May 12, <br /> 1989, one each from the following parties, Berkley Eng. &Const., <br /> John Fluke Mfg.Co,E&H Properties and Schnitzer Inv.Corp. <br /> Following today's public hearing the council has four options: 1. <br /> To Affirm Mitigo <br /> ated Determination of Non-Significance{ 2. Remand <br /> project to staff to generate specific additional information. 3. <br /> Recommend preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS); or <br /> O.Make additional findings and based on those findings, revise the <br /> Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance. <br /> He said there were nine issues appealedwith somef them <br /> erlapping. A few of the issues have been resolved anoneof the <br /> appealants has withdrawn their appeal. Hopefully the others will <br /> agree to the modifications to the mitigated determination. <br /> He said one <br /> of the issues is the PUO problem for the location of a <br /> substation site and transmission lines and he believes all <br /> appealants have agreed to the solution. He reviewed the various <br /> issues appealed including slope stability d reclamationof <br /> ftM1the <br /> east side of the parcel,traffic signals needed, timing and <br /> of payment of transportation contribution, landscaping requirements <br /> and that <br /> tne iPermits.e site plan be recorded prior to issuance of <br /> grading or building <br /> The re o neation is to deny the-appeals d approve maeificetions <br /> to prep Obli findings <br /> gsotexminatlusions Non-SS9niflcance and tlixedt staff <br /> pare andcone <br /> Clay Bush of the John Fluke Company agreed oth the mitigation on <br /> the location of the PUo substation a d transmissin lines. <br /> Al Peterson of Berkley Engineering and Construction also agreed with <br /> the staff's recommendation on the location of the substation and <br /> transmission lines and felt this wet no longer an issue. HB also <br /> agreed that Prom a safety standpoint the steep slopes on the ate <br /> should be reclaimed to a finished <br /> leslthe of 1 decasi0::1 thatwith <br /> LM1e biriate <br /> nding <br /> vegetation, however, he appea r building <br /> ante plan berecorded prior to issuanceou b giant do the slope <br /> permils. He said he w old like to mov de g <br /> weather <br /> and reclamation of the east side of the parcel before bad <br /> sets in. He would onlyagalea on one side of the pe opexty, <br /> • word enough to obtain the materials for the lopeld be done.said he <br /> would Pence off the area so that no other graving woad <br />