My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010/05/26 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2010
>
2010/05/26 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2023 3:55:47 PM
Creation date
4/19/2017 11:06:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
5/26/2010
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1073
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Response to Comments <br />CEMEX Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement <br />November 30, 2009 <br />Chapter 1 <br />General Comments and City Responses <br />Comments are arranged by topic, in chronological order by date received, with most recent <br />listed first. <br />1. Steve Boyer <br />Comments in support of proposal, "The proposal would bring a very beneficial mix of <br />residential, retail and commercial development in the area, while preserving a substantial <br />component of (higher density) industrial land." Neighbors concerns have been met. <br />Response: Thank you for your comments. <br />2. Clint Stanovsky <br />Stanovsky Consulting <br />Comments in support of proposal, speaks of needed support for and value to surrounding land <br />uses and owners. Finishes with, ".. CEMEX proposal is a unique and timely opportunity for <br />south Everett neighborhoods to internalize the benefits of the significant industrial base that <br />already exists in our area, because of the timing, scale and resources available to the project; I <br />believe its success is crucial to the future health of south Everett." <br />Response: Thank you for your comments. <br />3. Dennis Dudder <br />Comments in support of proposal, ".. The current proposal leaves more industrial property <br />available for small business development that encourages manufacturing jobs rather than the <br />oversized less employees warehousing. Homes in area would buffer (sensitive) uses east of <br />Glenwood. Favors Alternative 2, retain R-2 zoning east of Glenwood Avenue. <br />Response: Thank you for your comments. <br />Chapter 1 — General Comments <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.