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
Bob Larsen <br />To: Kathy Pierson <br />Cc: Dave Koenig <br />Subject: CEMEX Review <br />Ms Pierson: <br />As you now know, CEMEX is seeking to convert most of their Everett site from Industrial zoning and use to mixed use; <br />residential, office and retail. The review process we are using to consider this request is the annual GMA (Growth <br />Management Act) docket cycle, as prescribed by the State of Washington. The first formal step in this process is the <br />SEPA review. In the Case of CEMEX we are conducting an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in order to more fully <br />understand related issues, conduct studies, and take other steps necessary to help our decision makers come to an <br />informed decision on this matter. <br />Following SEPA review, approvals at this stage of the process could include a change in use and a conceptual site plan. <br />After that, if the request is approved, CEMEX could then return at a future date and seek permits for site preparation <br />and building. The second step is what we refer to as the "project specific" stage. At that point further project specific <br />SEPA submittals would be provided, followed by analysis and potential mitigation requirements. <br />The current conceptual site design CEMEX has submitted shows a 10 acre storm water retention basin where the noted <br />contaminated soils are located. The contaminated soils information provided by your agency, in conjunction with <br />requested change in use and conceptual site plan, has raised questions that we hope you can answer, specially: <br />® If the proposed change in use were granted, would there be restrictions on land uses above or near the area <br />where the contaminated soils are stored, if so, what would the restriction be, <br />® Would there be an limitations on uses on top of or near this location, <br />® Would it be permissible to put a storm water retention basin in this location, and <br />® If a storm water basin were located over or near the contaminated soils, or even in some other location(s) on <br />site, would it be permissible to allow such retained water to percolate into the soil? <br />Thank you for expertise on this matter, and for the information you have provided to date. <br />Sincerely, <br />Bob Larsen, Senior Planner <br />Everett Planning and Community Development <br />CC: David Koenig, Manager <br />Long Range Division <br />Everett Planning and Community Development <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.