Laserfiche WebLink
Finding: The change would implement a new way to mitigate for traffic impacts. <br /> Implementing the Direct Count Program would track the actual PM Peak Hour Trips <br /> • Boeing is generating regardless of employee count or on-site parking. Boeing will be <br /> required to mitigate for traffic increases beyond what they have already paid mitigation. <br /> The number of employees at any given moment is difficult to track and an increase in <br /> employee levels may or may not impact the amount of vehicular traffic that is <br /> generated, especially as current or new transportation options are developed and <br /> improved in the future. Changing the methodology to counting actual traffic to the site <br /> will ensure that Boeing will mitigate for actual trip generation. <br /> Any new parking lot construction on the Boeing property will require a review for <br /> consideration of impacts on surface water, critical areas and land use. No new parking <br /> lot construction is proposed at this time. <br /> 2. The change will substantially and negatively affect an adjoining property in a manner <br /> not addressed in the EIS and this document. <br /> Finding: By implementing the Direct Count Program,traffic will be counted on a <br /> continuous basis with quarterly reporting, and if PM peak hour trips go over the <br /> baseline,traffic mitigation fees will be due.The change should not substantially or <br /> negatively affect an adjoining property, as increases in traffic to the Boeing site will be <br /> mitigated by traffic mitigation fees. <br /> 3. The change will result in a major increase in offsite impacts, such as traffic or noise, not <br /> analyzed, where appropriate, and mitigated in this review process. <br /> Finding: The proposed change is not project specific and it will not generate additional <br /> traffic, noise or other impacts that have not already been analyzed in the 1991 EIS. <br /> Conclusion: The proposed modifications to the Mitigation Decision Document are <br /> minor for the reasons stated above. The changes: <br /> • Are not in substantial conflict with any conditions in the Decision Document; <br /> • Will not substantially and negatively affect an adjoining property; and <br /> • Will not result in a major increase in offsite impacts. <br /> MITIGATION MEASURES: The environmental impacts of this proposal are documented in the <br /> Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the City. The listed requirements <br /> are placed in response to our review of this information: <br /> MITIGATION OF ADVERSE IMPACTS BY SEPA: <br /> 1134 <br />