4910 27TH AVE W 2018-01-02 MF Import

c. Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health, or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;" The approval of this short plat violates the letter and spirit of Everett's Environmental Polcy. It Ignores the wetlands and sensitive nature of the property. We are prejudiced by having the wetlands study come after the approval, rather than before it. We are denied any meaningful way of challenging whatever study the proponent might produce. This Is a classic case of putting the "Cart before the Horse". Thus essential and relevant Information is lacking. The present configuration of the properties places developoment In each of the lots in wetland areas. One of the appellants contacted Bill Lenard of the Washington State Department of Ecology who said that the applicant's wetland study should be submitted for evaluation before a determination Is made. The decision to go ahead with the approval of this project without the evaluation of the proper studies, regardless of the mitigation measures, is per = arbitrary and capricious and clearly erroneous. The obvious wetland and fragile sloped nature of the property, apparent to the unsophisticated observer, and the fact that an expert has identified wetlands on the property, singly and together demonstrate that the proposed development of the property is in violation of the Subdivision Ordinance and Everet Municipoal Code provisions quoted above and will most probably generate significiant adverse environmental Impacts In violation of Sub.Ord Section 4, D, 3, e. The City does not require the developer to conduct a geotechnical study, although it does "encourage" it. This study should be made a requirement before the matter Is considered for approval or rejection. The study should not only examine the subject property but adjacient and nearby property as well.. The hillside In general la_a Seepage area. One seep has very recently been found to emerge from under the nearest dwelling and courses north and west onto the applicant's property. Some Indication exists that a property within 100 to 150 yards to the south has experienced landslide activity requiring the placement of over 100 railroad ties. Surely the City has a record of this construction activity. Other Indication exists of subsidence or. adjacient or nearby property. These Indications should be verified. Additional examination of seeps and possible landslide and subsidence areas should be made before a determination is made. Further, since the property contains organic and hydric solls, a strong likelihood exists that much such soil must be removed, replaced with compactable material and then mechanically compacted. The possible effects of the vibrations from mechanical compacting on the neighboring properties must be addressed by a geotechnical study. Public safety, health and Interest questions aboud In this aspect of the proposed subdivision, not to mention questions of potential liability of the City of Everett for approval of such building activity in an area demonstrating such geolocial anomalies. (See Sub.Ord. Section 4. 3. e. r