Loading...
1628 - Resolution - South Kitsap Health Care Campus ProjectRESOLUTION NO. 1628 v A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON SETTING FORTH FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS RELEVANT TO THE APPEAL(S) TO THE DETERMINATION OF NON --SIGNIFICANCE ISSUED ON THE SOUTH KITSAP HEALTH CARE CAMPUS PROJECT, N.L. OLSON AND ASSOC., INC., PROPONENT WHEREAS, a City of Port Orchard Environmental Checklist was submitted for the South Kitsap Health Care Campus Project, by N. L. Olson and Associates, Inc., Proponent; and WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard responsible SEPA Official did issue a Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for the South Kitsap Health Care Campus Project; and WHEREAS, the City did receive an appeal to the Determination of Non -significance for the South Kitsap Health Care Campus Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard SEPA Appeal Board did hold a Public Hearing on December 28, 1992 to receive testimony and evidence relevant to the Appeal(s) of the Determination of Non - significance; and WHEREAS, the City SEPA Appeal Board did consider the facts of the appeal(s), testimony and materials presented at the hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD SEPA APPEAL BOARD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: THAT the City of Port Orchard SEPA Appeal Board does deny the appeal to the South Kitsap Health Care Campus Determination of Non- significance as filed by Gayle HeIseth-Kenison as follows: APPEAL ITEM #1: "The DNS fails to consider the enormous increase in car trips that this development will generate when Built out, with many of these cars turning left to go to Highway 16. The sight distance onto and from Tremont Street is extremely poor, and will result in many accidents. The alternative would be a re --alignment of the roads and a traffic light, resulting in traffic back-ups, and a change of Tremont from a smooth moving arterial to another traffic clogged, accident infested city street." Resolution No. 1628 Page two of three FINDING: The project will increase the traffic volumes on the adjacent streets. FACT: Traffic mitigation measures have been considered as an integral part of the proposed project; and have been adequately addressed in the Traffic Analysis Report. CONCLUSION: Based on testimony, materials presented and findings of fact, the Port Orchard SEPA Board of Appeals does hereby uphold the Determination of Non -significance in regard to traffic impact as sufficient consideration was given to traffic impacts APPEAL ITEM #2: "The DNS fails to consider the massive amount of storm water runoff created by a development of this magnitude with the amount of impervious surface proposed. Considerable environmental impacts have already occurred to Ross creek and Sinclair inlet with the clearing and grading of this property." FINDING: The stormwater from the project will be significantly altered as compared to the stormwater prior to development. FACT: Stormwater management will be required to meet the standards as established by the Department of Fisheries and impacts have been adequately addressed. CONCLUSION: Based on testimony, materials presented and findings of fact, the Port Orchard SEPA Board of Appeals does hereby uphold the Determination of Non -significance in regard to stormwater management as potential adverse environmental impacts have been identified and addressed based on best management practice standards and policies. APPEAL ITEM #3: "The DNS fails to consider the Growth Management Act and mandated changes upcoming in the near future for the comprehensive plan for the area, as well as the required coordination of planning between infrastructure (such as storm water plans, schools, services, and roads) and land use planning." Resolution No. 1628 Page three of three FINDING: The Growth Management Act rules and regulations were enacted to address and control urbanized development in rural areas and encourage development of urban areas. (cities). Rules and regulations for growth management have not yet been enacted. FACT: This project is within the boundaries of an urban area and thus Growth Management rules and regulations when adopted will relate to projects of this size and nature. CONCLUSION: Based on testimony, materials presented and findings of fact, the Port Orchard SEPA Board of Appeals does hereby uphold the Determination of Non -significance in regard to Growth Management Act. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Orchard, APPROVED by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk in authentication of such passage this 11th day of January, 1993. �-J LESL I E J. WEATHER LL, MAYOR ATTEST: Patricia Hower, City Clerk