Laserfiche WebLink
Ci 598 <br /> October 30,1991 <br /> C <br /> reconsideration. The current Section 37 of the Zoning Code is <br /> effective on an interim basis, expiring on December 1, 1991. <br /> Dennis Beich, Environmental Planner, and Tom Lux, Planning <br /> Commission Vice Chairman,were available for questions. <br /> President Morrow asked if there was any public comment. The <br /> following people responded. <br /> Ted Trepanier 1420 Grand Avenue, Everett, had concerns <br /> regarding the l'ollowing items: lot size averaging (delete item <br /> to); transfer development rights (eliminate); identification <br /> and classifcation of Wetlands according to most current <br /> publication; administrative hearing process; and transfer <br /> rights. <br /> Reid Shockey, 2924 Colby Avenue, Everett, requested that a <br /> public workshop be held. He reported that there was an effort <br /> underway by business groups to adopt a position paper, 10 key <br /> tests for evaluating wetland regulations, and suggested that <br /> Council wait until this was done. <br /> Jim Miller 19400 33rd Avenue W., Lynnwood, representing Master <br /> Builders of King and Snohomish Counties made the following <br /> comments regarding the policy document: disagreed that 105 <br /> slopes are unstable and that "all" wetlands should be <br /> preserved. He felt the wildlife habitat plans were unclear as <br /> to when they would be employed. Regarding the regulation <br /> document it appears that wetlands are the "only" consideration <br /> not "one" consideration. Wetlands should be prioritized - <br /> preserve Class 1 wetlands. protect Class II wetlands; conserve <br /> Class III wetlands; and deregulate Class IV wetland. He <br /> encouraged clustering and supported transfer development rights <br /> and mitigation banking. He felt dispute resolution should be <br /> addressed. He then passed out a letter to Snohomish County <br /> (October 21, 1991 from Edward D. Hansen) regarding property <br /> rights and fairness. <br /> Nina Oneil, 3324 Grand, representing the Port of Everett, <br /> stated that this ordinance would have a very negative effect <br /> upon the Port. She said environmental regulations are already <br /> in place for the Port and asked that the Port be excluded from <br /> the ordinance regulations. <br /> Dennis Gregoire,Director of Planning for the Port of Everett, <br /> emphasized that the Port was quite adequately covered by <br /> regulations, citing the 404B process and shoreline permits. <br /> Dennis handed out a memo to councilmembers recommending that <br /> projects and developments located along the shoreline where <br />