Resolution 3528 - Laserfiche WebLink

• • The Decision Document requires that mitigation funds provided to Everett and to other jurisdictions be applied to projects that will mitigate impacts generated by the Boeing (Master Development Plan) Expansion. • A reasonable procedure to convey mitigation funds to other jurisdictions has been provided in the Decision Document, and this procedure ensures that the funds will be used to mitigate impacts of the Boeing Expansion. • Appellant's have not offered data or information to the record to support this allegation. Decision: Deny the appeal and affirm Section VI.B "Payment Provisions for Other Jurisdictions" of the Decision Document as set forth by the Responsible Official. SECTION 20: POTENTIAL SYS ThM IMPROVEMENT LIST NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED Findings: • The mitigation identifies only facilities that fail (exceed LOS E) during the "worse case" period of 2:30 to 3:30 p.m. (Boeing Peak). • Several facilities that are listed in Snohomish County's Road Needs Study do not fail during the Boeing Peak. • The City of Everett receives less than 16 percent of the mitigation fees. • Snohomish County receives 22 percent or$10,375,000 in transportation mitigation funds, including $7,525,000 in County-only funding assistance. • Impacts in key corridors involving County facilities may be mitigated by alternative means and/or redefined projects as provided for in the Decision Document • The County's method of calculating impacts differs from Everett's method. Everett's method focuses on peak travel times, includes State and other jurisdiction facilities and requires that a facility fail in order to receive mitigation. • The City's existing SEPA Policy is contained in Ordinance No. 1670-89 as amended, the Interim Transportation Mitigation Ordinance (ITMO). Traffic mitigation requirements were based on the policy contained in ITMO, as applicable. 33