3003 W CASINO RD 1990 BASE FILE 2018-01-01 MF Import

' 1 1 • ' III. INTRODUCTTON TO MITIGATION' IA�OSED BY Rl�SP(yNSIBLE OFF'ICIAI, 'i'he Baing ezpanuon proposat at Paine Fidd represen�s one oi�he largut conswcdon projxrs in the histocy of Washington state. The etfect on che economy oi Evereu, the surrounding azras and, indeed, the entue state will be substandal and many commena wen received during the SEPA commenc period urging ttie Ciry to "just get on wi[h it". However, both SEPA and good public poticy require that as the decision makers consider permitting such a massive undertabng, they do so fuily cognirant of the environmental implications of the activity. Thereiore, the impacts associated wi[h the projxt have been carefupy ana(yzed in the EIS. The impacts analyzed in the EIS, and the required mitiga[ion measures wntalned in this Document, aze based on azsumptions and expectauons as co iuture activiry. An ezcepdonally large and complicated project such as the Bceing expans�on. «•hich is to be undertalcen over several years, will test the Gmits oi our abitit}• to predict w•nh precision what will result az th� project is built. Such a project wili also test use ot the SEPA process to measure impacu and prescnbc mitigation measures. While some of the impacts addmsud in the EI5 are relatively predictable, and appropriate midgauon can be readily asce,rtained, others such as uansportaaon ue more specularive in nature. Por instance, we cannot predict wi�h cenainty how peopte will n.spond to new requirements for tianspo�tation demand management -- ride sharing, buus and van pooling; it is not a simpie task W ptedict with precision the outcome of effons W modify peopie�s behavior in terms of their preferced made of ttansportadon and their commute to woric. Additionally, there are many other variables wh��h must be accounted for in the masuremmt of significant vansportation impacu and seletaon of mitigadon, such u futurc development acdvitia in the viciniry of the projxt and availability of federal, state and local funding. Uncer[aincy is not limited W transportation impacu. I�tuiy other ateas of impact and necessuy mitigadnn aze equally impracise. Nevertheless, the responsibiliry of the City of Everett in the conduct of this er.vironmental review and resulting midgaaon decision is to evaluate the impactt, disclose these impacts to decision makcrs and the public, and proscribe appropriate midgadon measurc:. These �iariable,c makt the SEPA mitigadon process at best a reawn�bk predicdon of and response to future events. SEPA was intended by the legislature to ensure a stewudship of the environment, to provide a disclosure process, and w ensure that environmental considendons are weighed along with economic and technical consideradons in azriving at a Final decision on a pn,;iosat. It does not guaiantee nor rcquire that all adverse environmental impacts be mitigated. However, decision m3kers and the public can ezpect that the roquirements which are contained in this Decision document will be implemen[ed. The mitigadon process contained 7