04/28/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 28, 2003 APPROVED 479 080 Councilmember Carlson asked that the City Planner go through the criteria for an EIS and explain his 481 position for the audience and those at home. 482 483 City Planner Smyser clarified he does not have a position, he has a recommendation, and it is up to 484 the Council to take a position. He read through the criteria for an EIS from Subp. 7. A -D, and 485 explained each in detail, starting with D. 486 D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result 487 of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project 488 proposer, including other EISs. Typically intended to mean if there is another EIS or EAW 489 on the area, it could be used. He is not aware of any other EIS that has been prepared for 490 this area. 491 C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing 492 public regulatory authority. The project plan has not been received. This will be subject 493 to staff review and many other government agencies will also require approval. 494 B. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. This refers to a 495 project that will develop over time, meaning the EAW has to include all phases. Over the 496 years, there have been a lot of phased projects; this mandates that all are reviewed at 497 once. 498 A. type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects. 499 500 He reviewed staff's summary on the following points: 501 • The Heron Rookery — the DNR letter did not say there was no impact, it said EIS will not tell W02 us anymore than the EAW already has. 03 • Traffic and Roadways — this is a huge issue, but as stated in the report, the issue is not caused 504 by the church. The City is in the process with a number of surrounding districts of looking at 505 I -35E and the Interchange. They have included the Counties in the discussion, and are 506 looking at a 35 Corridor Study. They also met last week to talk about 20th Avenue, as there is 507 significant growth planned on 20t'~ Avenue. All of this needs to be addressed, and the City 508 does not have the resources to do it on their own, nor do they have all of the regulatory 509 control. He added the City has the ability with a Conditional Use Permit to regulate how 510 things are done and address issues. 511 • Wetlands, Visual Aspects — he reviewed the wetland comments, and lighting standards, and 512 stated there is a misunderstanding on the spire. He stated this is not a typical spire with a bell 513 tower, etc. Again, with the Conditional Use Permit the City can make sure the design is 514 acceptable. 515 516 In summary, staff's recommendation is that an EIS is not necessary, as the issues have either been 517 address or can be addressed through the normal process. 518 519 Councilmember Carlson asked about the cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future 520 projects portion of the criteria. She asked if that includes other projects in the same area. City 521 Planner Smyser stated that was a little vague, but it could include them; that is one of the reasons they 522 are looking at the corridor study. 523 524 Councilmember Reinert asked about the estimated cost and timeframe to complete an EIS. City 025 Planner Smyser indicated they are all different, but one he worked on for the University of Minnesota 11