Laserfiche WebLink
sae December 27,1989 <br /> COUNCIL BILL 8912-126 <br /> FINAL READING: <br /> N ORDINANCE establishing aninterim traffic mitigation <br /> } policy for the City of Everett <br /> Moved by Councilmember Longus, seco ded by Councilmember Diamond <br /> that this is declared to be the final reading of Council Bill <br /> 8912-126. <br /> { Dave Davis,Traffic Engineer,reviewed the traffic projects <br /> proposed <br /> throughout the City: He stated there axe 65 projects a cost t of <br /> 1 $68,322,000. The proposed traffic mitigation ordinance is an <br /> enhancement eP the c x nt SEPA process. <br /> Warren,s Dana Cornerstone Columbia, 1011 western, Seattle, agrees <br /> I! with the intent of the proposed ordinance but recommended that the <br /> i< costs should be borne by H <br /> 11 users. Ha felt thata funding was not <br /> equitable between the small and large projects. requestedthat <br /> the adoption be postponed to allow. for a publicworkshop on the <br /> issue. <br /> 1 Brent Carson, <br /> 1011 western, attorney Por Cornerstone Columbia, <br /> his comments on the grandfathering'of approved projects e <br /> FY <br /> requested thata section 21 be added giving fair credit fox <br /> transportation improvements that have been imposed as a condition of <br /> a prior land use <br /> approval. <br /> I Harry Henke,President of HDMC at Seaway <br /> enter, asked that Council <br /> confirm that their project hes adequate mitigation and that they are <br /> not required to provide additional mitigation on their development. <br /> John Roberts,..attorney Ror Seaway Center,stated they recti mend that <br />{�' a g[endfmthar clause-be incaxp orated into the preposetl ortlinence. <br /> Randy Blair, of Wilsey Ham Pacific, recommended that additional <br /> language be added to assure that approved projects a not required <br /> to provide further mitigation. <br /> Chuck Patten, Everett School District, asked that the school <br /> district not be included in the traffic mitigation proposal. <br /> Schools do not have funding for mitigation and if required, the <br /> funds haie to be expended from capital funds. <br /> 41' <br /> uncilmember Langus stated h felt the schools should be given some <br /> ': '� #i special consideration as they d not ate the problems,but try to <br /> �} D BBB t schools according neighborhood needs and n actually <br /> �'{Y reducevehicle trips. <br /> 3, ,'I ti' Mr. <br /> Davis ho 1 bus.in the traffic counts each vehicle is'.considered, <br /> ,141141 <br /> Jim Shoemake%Superintendent of Mukilteo School District, asked that <br /> i I schools be excluded from the ordinance. Schools axe located due to <br /> the neighborhood heeds. Schools do not have the option of providing <br /> a service. <br /> ¢ Jj ,x1, <br />