My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013/01/09 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2013
>
2013/01/09 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/8/2018 10:45:22 AM
Creation date
5/24/2017 9:44:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
1/9/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
984
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
4 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. <br />Central Waterfront Redevelopment Plan <br />Shoreline Public Access Plan designates a shoreline trail through this property as part of the long <br />term plan to develop a continuous shoreline trail along the Snohomish River (See Figure H). <br />Kimberly-Clark has not had any major shoreline permits issued since adoption of the current <br />SMP in 2002. However, a 1993 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the Cogeneration <br />Facility with Snohomish PUD No. 1 required construction of an off-site viewing platform along <br />the bluff at 22nd Street, including dedication of 4 lots. <br />I. Proposed Land Use Regulations and Development Standards for Alternatives <br />The draft alternatives included a comparison matrix that spelled out changes to permitted uses <br />and the potential changes to development standards under each of the 4 land use alternatives. A <br />SERA Addendum to the SEIS for the 10 -Year Comprehensive Plan Update evaluated the impacts <br />of the four alternatives and addressed potential mitigation measures to further reduce the impacts <br />of development in the Central Waterfront Planning Area. This information was used by the <br />Planning Conunission to give staff direction for developing a Preferred Alternative. See Section <br />2 for the land use regulations for the Preferred Alternative. <br />J. Economic Analysis of Alternatives <br />The Economic Report prepared by Property Counselors (see Appendix 6) was developed prior to <br />the development of the 4 land use alternatives. The City's consultant identified those uses that <br />are likely to be economically viable on the Central Waterfront. Several economic concepts were <br />identified that do not match precisely the land use alternatives described in this draft. However, <br />all of the economic concepts evaluated in the economic report can be realized under the 4 land <br />use alternatives. Rather than attempt to revise the economic concepts, this section will explain <br />how they would be possible under the draft land use alternatives. <br />The staff / consultant team has developed 4 alternative land use / public access scenarios for <br />consideration and evaluation for the planning process. The 4 land use alternatives do not match <br />precisely the 4 economic concepts identified in the economic report. However, the analysis of <br />the 4 economic concepts would generally be consistent with the land use alternatives as <br />described below: <br />1. The "Water -dependent industrial use for the entire site" economic concept is very similar <br />to both Land Use Alternative #1 (Existing Regulations) and Land Use Alternative #2 <br />(Water -dependent and Heavy Industrial). <br />2. The "Non -water -dependent use on entire site" economic concept is very similar to Land <br />Use Alternative #3 (Business Park and Public Access). <br />is <br />116 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.