Laserfiche WebLink
, • ' <br /> • Ltr to Iadiser <br /> Mazch 13, 1992 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Haeing proposed and the Counry approved, miagation in Powder Mill Cnek: A basin <br /> within Boeing's property and immediately adja:ent ta Japanese Creek). <br /> It is the City's position that of the five alternativw dixusxd, che Pigeon Crcek No. 1 <br /> rostoration project i� the cloxst mitigadon method and perhaps the only midgation <br /> alternadve for which a dinct relationship to the impact can be shown. The nexus <br /> betwan the im}mcts in Japanese Cralc(ae identified in the Counry's SEPA review) and <br /> the Pigeon Cra�No. 1 mitigadon proposal are set fotth below: <br /> • T'he impact was the filling and culverting of approximately 3,000 fat of Japanese � <br /> Creelc. The Pigeon Creek mitigation would result in opening up approximately <br /> 3,000 feet of Pigeon Creek No. 1. It providea in-ldnd mitigation (Fisheriea Habitat <br /> ResWntion). <br /> • Both Japanex Creek and Pigeon Crak dnin t� the north into Port Gardner Bay. <br /> • Pigeon Crak No. i is in the immediate vicinity of the Baeing site and is the closest <br /> basin of the'midgadon alternatives. <br /> • Restoration of Pigeon Creek No. 1 would be a highly visible project with <br /> significant long term public educadon benefits. <br /> • The initiel rostoration effort within Pigeon Creek No. 1 have alieady geaented <br /> substantial community pride and ownership. The efforts have rcceived intemadoeal <br /> newspaper and television nedia attendon. TMe effort includa �chool children and <br /> school programs on environmental educadon and awarenesa. <br /> • A feasibiliry study (attachat) has alieady been completed uid ttw City would <br /> commit W procxding with the midgadon prngram in the summer of 1993. <br /> While each of the other midga6on altemaaves whic6 have baa discussed may have <br /> substantial merit, we do not see a demonstrated nladonship behwxn those alternatives <br /> and the impect+ which are the basis of imposing the mitigahon requirement For <br /> example, we recogniu and appreciate the sigaificant merits of the Adopt-a-Strwm <br /> progcam. However, it is our wderstar►ding that this midga6on alternadve includes the <br /> construction of an office structure. We believe tt�at such mitigation ahould be required <br /> only when in-Idnd habitat midgadon opdons are unavailable. <br /> The City recommends that the pieviously issua' DNS be modified. We would suggest <br /> that the County prepare an addendum to iu environmental analysis ae prnvided for <br />