2010/05/26 Council Agenda Packet

April 15, 2009 Page 2 1992 and 2004. Please specify which of these EISs will be supplemented by the SETS. Please also provide clarification as to why an SEIS, and not a full EIS, is being prepared for the Proposal. Traffic. As noted in our MDNS Letter, the SEIS should include an analysis of LOS and other traffic data and projections in its analysis of transportation impacts. See WAC 197-11-444(2)(c). These analyses should take into account the full buildout of the Proposal, and should assume the _maximum size, density, and traffic generation of the uses that would be permitted under the Proposal, specifically including those intersections that are along Stockpot's truck delivery routes, and the study areas for the AM and PM peak hours should be consistent. The SEIS should also discuss mitigation measures that will ensure maintenance of existing levels of service not only in the immediate vicinity of the Proposal, but also in the area surrounding the Proposal. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses. The SEIS should discuss mitigation measures that would protect surrounding industrial uses in continuing activities that could potentially be objectionable to residential, commercial, and small-scale industrial users. See WAC 197-11- 444(2) (impacts to "built environment" to be considered). During the public hearing held for the SEIS Scoping on April 7, 2008, a number of residents voiced concerns about the impacts that CEMEX's operations have had on residential uses in the vicinity. These comments are illustrative of the conflicts that arise when industrial, residential, and commercial uses are located near one another. The Proposal contemplates establishing new residential, commercial, and small-scale industrial uses near existing industrial areas. For this reason, the Proposal will likely create additional land use conflicts, and will exacerbate the conflicts between existing uses. During the public hearing on April 7, 2008, the applicant highlighted its preference for small -lot industrial uses within the Proposal. These small-scale industrial uses are likely to conflict with the residential areas near—and within—the proposal site, as well as with the existing industrial uses in the vicinity. This lack of compatibility with surrounding uses, and the lack of compatibility of the uses within the Proposal are among the numerous land use impacts that should be considered and mitigated under SRPA. See, e.g., WAC 197-11-444(2)(b) ("land and shoreline use"). Such mitigation could include, for example, requiring conveyances of easements and notices on title. As noted in our MDNS Letter, StockPot's production activities on occasion emit odors that are well within regulatory limits but that some residential and commercial users may find objectionable. This also is the case for noise emissions. StockPot proposes that the City mitigate this impact by requiring the applicant to convey an easement, binding on all lots created by future subdivisions in the Proposal area, that expressly permits Stockpot to emit odors that are within the limits established by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency and noise within established regulatory limits. See also, WAC 197-11444, Subsections (1)(a), (1)(b) and (2)(b) (air quality, odor, noise and land use to be considered). This odor and noise easement is similar to the aviation notice/easement for odor, vibrations, and noise suggested by the Boeing Company in its November 18, 2008 MDNS comment letter. Such mitigation could also include installation of additional noise and//or odor mitigation devices at the Stockpot culinary campus.