Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Coua�eil 11�C�eti�r� <br />1l�Io�►d�y, ,T�ly 2�, 2007 <br />Page 4� <br />1 specified by the arevzewing agencies, and as autlzned in �he draft reso- <br />2 luiion's Findings of Fact. <br />3 <br />4 City Attorney Anderson reviewed the process for scnding �he or�ginal <br />5 documen� to agencies for comrnent, and noted ihat the process antici- <br />6 pated tha� comments wou�d be made and responses would initially be <br />7 provided by the applicant and become part af the recard. Mr. Ander- <br />S son opined that this was the envzaranmental review pracess at work �o <br />9 zmprove proposed projects as indicated with revisions to the proposed <br />10 Site and 1Vlast�r planse <br />11 <br />1� Counczlmember Xhlan expressed her opinion regarding additional in- <br />1� adequacies o�'the EAW, requiring an EI�, related to the size and Ioca- <br />14 �zon af st�uctu�re� and squar� �ootages of the s�rue�ure�; defining which <br />�5 pian was being presented; and the seope and nature of fia�l-time <br />16 equzvalent (FT�) s�udent caleulations and relatcd traffic impacts. <br />17 Counci�m�mbear Ihlan fi.��rther addxessed potential tree �emoval; <br />l 8 wooded habi�at and brush and grassland areas; and erosion and drain- <br />19 age issues. <br />20 <br />21 Mayor Kiausing recogniz�d Couneilmemb�x Ihlan's p�c��rence �'or an <br />22 E�S; however, expressed h�s personal opinion and conf dence that <br />23 there was no need �or an EIS. Mayor Klausing sought comment frorz� <br />24 o�h�r Cc�unc�lmembers. <br />25 <br />26 Caunczlmember Roe noted his extensive review of agency and eitizen <br />27 comments and Ca��ege responses; xecogn��ed the zmpartance of the <br />28 documen�; and op�ned h�s satzs�action �hat �esponses to the comments <br />29 were substantive and applieable; and further opined that t�e �AW ap- <br />30 peared to b� accurate and comple�e. Councilmcmber Roe opined that, <br />31 at some po�nt, consideratzon wa� requxred io accept exper� input on <br />32 some o� the ques�ions; and if there remained particu�a�r areas �ox xndi- <br />33 v�dua� Councilmember concern thai required addirional specific in- <br />34 formatipn, he was w�l��ng to make thai �requesfi. Couneilmember Roe <br />35 advised that he had read aIi the letters and responses, and expar�ssed <br />36 appreciation �or the input, and they served to answer the majority o� <br />37 h�s quesi�ons and made ref�rence ta responses in the EAW question- <br />38 naire. <br />39 <br />