Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> 4.7 of the FEIR fully complies with the requirement for incorporation by reference <br /> found in the CEQA guidelines. ~~ <br /> City Attorney Schricker clarified that whether or not it is really stated in the EIR that <br /> Sedway is incorporated by reference is up to the Council to decide. <br /> MEMO 5/9/95 <br /> Mayor Gasparini stated that Vice Mayor Hartnett is not looking for any changes or <br /> additions in the Sedway report but whether or not that one clarification be included as <br /> a full document rather than as a reference. <br /> Planning Director Patterson advised that there is a list of 15 reference items in the <br /> table of contents of the report and that the information has been, and is currently <br /> available in the Planning Department. <br /> Vice Mayor Hartnett summed up that everyone recognizes that whether or not there <br /> is a technical deficiency in the EIR that those technical deficiencies could be resolved <br /> and eventually an EIR could be certified. <br /> Vice Mayor Hartnett thanked the Planning Commission and the staff for working <br /> through this long and difficult process to come up with a good product. The spirit of <br /> CEQA has been met by this process but there are technical issues remain in the <br /> product. <br /> Councilwoman La Berge asked for input from the City Attorney on what must be <br /> included in the EIR. <br /> MEMO 5/9/95 <br /> MIS: LA BERGE/SANFILIPO to continue the meeting until 11 :30 p.m. <br /> CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. <br /> City Attorney Schricker advised that state guidelines provide that the EIR must <br /> describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or to the location of the <br /> project which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but <br /> would avoid to substantially lessen any of the significant effects ofthe project and that <br /> must evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. That range need not include <br /> speculative alternatives. The Supreme Court states that a project alternative which <br /> cannot be feasibly accomplished need not be extensively considered. A feasible <br /> alternative is one which can be accomplished in a successful manner within a <br /> reasonable period of time taking into account economic, environmental, social and <br /> technological factors. It is up to the Council to decide if the alternative analysis <br /> provided in the EIR report meets those standards. The discussion relating to the <br /> Sedway report is germane because that was an alternative study. The Council will <br /> need to determine if the EIR incorporates the report by reference in it or if that was the <br /> intent to do so and if that report provides an alternative analysis. For clarification the <br /> Regular Meeting Minutes <br /> May 8, 1995 <br /> MINUTE BOOK NO. 53 Page 11 <br /> Page No. 170 <br /> -- - - - <br />