CC Min 2000-11-13 Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8: 07 p.m. — Council Member Ira left the dais for Item 8. 8. PUBLIC HEARING — On Appeal of Planning Commission Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the proposed Downtown Retail- Cinema project; (405) Mayor Ruskin explained that in order for the public and Council to evaluate the merits of the proposal, an Environmental Impact Report is required by law. The Planning Commission held a series of scoping and public hearings where public comments, input and questions were expressed. The Planning Commission then oversaw a process by which those comments were answered in a Final Environmental Impact Report. The Environmental Impact Report analyzed the proposal in terms of parking, traffic, aesthetics and other key issues. The Planning Commission certified the report and it is now considered the Final Environmental Impact Report and will form the basis for Council and public discussion of the merits of the retail /cinema proposal. He further explained that the appeal by a private party is the subject of the hearing, Economic Development Coordinator Webb explained the environmental process and stated that three issues were raised in the appeal: Interim urgency ordinance/housing issues; contention of inadequate parking; and contention of inadequate traffic analysis. Ms. Webb stated the appellant claimed that the final EIR failed to analyze the impact of the ordinance. She proceeded to explain the staff response to the issue. Economic Development Coordinator Webb introduced Roberta Mundie of Mundie & Associates and Rob Reese of Fehr and Peers who addressed the contention of inadequate parking and inadequate traffic analysis. Ted Hannig, representing Powerhouse Gym presented his client's appeal. He stated the EIR was done prior to the interim urgency ordinance and that it fails to take into account past initial scoping and the impact on housing. He stated while the EIR observes there are unavoidable, adverse traffic impacts in various major arteries, it fails to model and study the potential of multiple failure simultaneously of those arteries, on both human safety and emergency response. He further stated that the parking issue has been miscalculated using data from the Urban Land Institute and does not consider the whole basis upon which the project is proposed. Mr. Hannig stated his final issue is one of fairness and that the EIR should go back for rework and suffer the same inconvenience that other constituents have due to the interim urgency ordinance. Council Members asked various questions of staff pertaining to the parking scenario and. Mayor Ruskin opened the public hearing. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER I3, 2000 PAGE 4 MINUTES Book No.58 Page NO. 252