Resolution 3197 - Laserfiche WebLink

0 008 Bay Ridge Development SMA 7-88 Page -7- 20. Witness Claflin submitted that there is no provision in the recommended approval by the City for the monitoring of the wetlands during construction. She was concerned that the limitations placed by the Department. of Ecology would not be implemented or adhered to by the developers. (Claflin testimony) Traffic 21. Ingress and egress to the site will be off S.R. 527 onto a three lane driveway. The Environmental Impact Statement reviewed the traffic and determined that the site distances from this proposed access will be adequate. (exhibit 19) 22. The proposed development will generate:' approximately 1,160 vehicular trips per day. Of these, 98 trips 'will be in the morning peak hours and 132 will be in the afternoon peak hours. The Applicant and the City submitted that the level of service of S.R. 527 is at LCE B during the morning period and LCE C during the afternoon. These two levels of service are acceptable. (Exhibit 19) 23. The City submitted that turning movements into the site must be monitored in order to gauge the need for future turning restrictions. At a later date, after additional information has been reviewed, it will be determined by the City of Everett if turning restrictions to this site from S.R. 527 are necessary. (Ervine testimony) 24. The Applicant submitted that a traffic light on 116th and S.R. 527 will provide sufficient gaps for unrestricted movement for the turn into the site. This, in addition with other traffic lights in the area, will create the necessary intervals for the turning traffic. (Enger testimony) 25. Because of the need to widen S.R. 527, the Applicant must provide additional right-of-way for such purposes. In addition to the right-of-way dedication, the City recommended that a bus pull-out be provided on the property's frontage if the State determines it is feasible. (Ervine testimony) 26. Various witnesses submitted testimony in opposition to the proposal. Much of this testimony was based on the amount of traffic on S.R. 527 and the additional traffic to be generated from the site. A summary of this testimony is as follows: A. Witness Dorthy Vandeventer submitted material contesting the validity of the information in the Environmental Impact Statement. In particular, she questioned the number of accumulative vehicular trips pers day on S.R. 527. She submitted that 23,054 vehicular trips per day was an incorrect statement of traffic and did not reflect the existing traffic on the street and the projected traffic. 000051