Laserfiche WebLink
<br />9. Regarding paragraph D of subpart 7 of Rule 44] 0.3610, Petitioners allege that the <br />Rottlund proposal, covering 70 acres of the 170 acre Twin Lakes Redevelopment <br />Area constitutes a "subarea". The Council determines this allegation to be <br />insignificant for the following reasons: <br /> <br />· The AUAR evaluated the "worst case scenario" for the entire 170 acre <br />Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area. <br /> <br />· The blend of uses for the worst case scenario was selected based on pre- <br />2001 Twin Lakes studies and financial reviews - no subareas were <br />established and no subarea-by-subarea analysis was conducted. Rather, the <br />worst case scenario covered the entire 170 acre area. <br /> <br />· Even if an analysis of environmental impacts were conducted on a b10ck- <br />by-block basis, this analysis would also support a conclusion of no increase <br />in adverse environmental effects presented by the Rottlund proposal. <br /> <br />10. Regarding paragraph E of subpart 7 of Rule 4410.3610, Petitioners allege that a <br />substantial change in public facilities has been proposed which may result in <br />increased adverse impacts on the environment. The Council determines that no <br />"substantial change" has occurred which could result in increased adverse impacts <br />for the following reasons: <br /> <br />· The phrase "substantial change" is not defined in EQB Rules, but the <br />common definition of the phrase, by reference to the American Heritage <br />Dictionary, would refer to changes that are". . . considerable in . . . extent". <br />Moreover, caselaw under NEP A has defined "substantial changes" as <br />changes that present "a seriously different picture of the likely <br />environmental consequences." <br /> <br />· Petitioners allege that the shifting of the location of Twin Lakes Parkway to <br />within approximately 95 feet of Langton Lake constitutes a substantial <br />change that may result in increased adverse impacts to the lake and wildlife <br />in Langton Lake Park. <br /> <br />· The AUAR recognized, at page 13, that the final location of Twin Lakes <br />Parkway would be determined as a part of actual development. Thus, <br />facially, no "change" in location has occurred in terms of AUAR <br />assumptions. <br /> <br />15 <br />