Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 12/04/06 <br />Minutes - Page 21 <br /> <br />AUAR; potential of future updates to the AUAR, rather than <br />separate environmental review documentation; site-specific and <br />cumulative environmental review impacts; policy rationale; <br />specific traffic concerns of Councilmember Ihlan for Fairview and <br />Cleveland Avenues in residential neighborhoods; and mitigation <br />strategies for Fairview and Lydia as identified on Page 16 of the <br />Mitigation Plan Appendix of the Draft AUAR Update. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing recognized Councilmember Ihlan's concerns; but <br />refocused discussion on whether or not to proceed with the Twin <br />Lakes Business Park AUAR Update; and sought her rationale for <br />not proceeding, excluding her dislike of the provisions 0 the Draft <br />AUAR Update. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan questioned the need to rush discussion at <br />this time; opining that there were not projects on the table, and <br />discussion could wait while the Council considered other options <br />and obtained outside counsel; and determination of whether it was <br />advantageous to look at environmental review on a site-by-site <br />basis or from a broader perspective. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing asked Mr. Stark to provide staff's rationale for <br />their recommendation and timing of the AUAR Update at this <br />time. <br /> <br />Mr. Stark advised that, while a Council decision, it would be more <br />attractive for future developers, and in consideration of the TIF <br />District expiration date, to have the Update in place; and that <br />based on the pending Comprehensive Plan Update assumptions <br />and Council support for the Twin Lakes area designated as <br />Business Park zoning. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka opined that the AUAR made sense from <br />a systematic and area-wide basis; further opined that when it was <br />done was not so important, however, opined that it would be <br />better to do the AUAR Update when there were no projects <br />pending. <br /> <br />Additional discussion included status of the Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendment; department-specific work to-date; lack of budgeted <br />monies; lack of staff expertise and capacity; and future request of <br />