Resolution 3528 - Laserfiche WebLink

• • Projects may, in some instances, be redefined to address identified Boeing impacts as provided for in the Decision Document (pp 35-36). Redefined projects should adhere to corridor totals and must continue to focus on mitigation of traffic impacts that result from the Boeing Expansion. Conclusions: • Facilities in the County's Road Needs Study that do not fail during the Boeing peak, consistent with the City's Interim Traffic Mitigation Ordinance, do not require mitigation. • Clarification of the process for utilizing mitigation payments in a flexible manner is consistent with SEPA rules. • The $10,375,000 identified in the Decision Document to mitigate transportation impacts on facilities within Snohomish County's jurisdiction results from a reasonable assessment of impacts on County facilities, and reasonable mitigation measures. • The record adequately identifies impacts caused by the project. • The record supports the Responsible Official's decision that mitigation measures imposed reasonably and adequately mitigate the identified adverse impacts. • The record does not include data or information supporting the appellants assertion that the mitigation is inadequate. Decision: Deny the appeal and affirm the Decision Document. The interlocal agreement between the City and County should define the level of flexibility needed in applying impact fees to corridor improvements. SECTION 21: POTENTIAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS LIST NEEDS TO INCLUDE: Airport Road, New road Bev-Park to SR-525, 100th Street, Airport to Holly Drive, 132nd Street Findings: • 112th Street is specifically included for mitigation at an estimated cost of $16 million. The mitigation does not include an interchange with I-5 and is subject to the determina- tion of an alignment from Airport Road to SR-525. All but about 1/2 mile of the 3.5 mile section is in the County and the 1/2 mile is a joint City/County project. A 3-lane design would not require widening of the I-5 overpass. 34