CC MIN 2013-05-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

on what they had done at the January meeting; Council agreed to delay the appeal to May 6 in that the goal being that the developer and State Lands Commission will work out some issues. So that on May 6, Council will know what decision to make. Continuing on, Dr. Bell said that since that time and towards the end of April, State Lands will rely on the City staff's EIR work. State Lands will be looking for specific items in the EIR and staff needs to go back and analyze the EIR and addendum to make sure it answers the recommendations; these are technical EIR related matters. So, Dr. Bell explained that staff is just providing an update at tonighYs Council meeting. Council mentioned that there are many choices to make regarding this appeal and asked clarification what are the consequences if Council denied the appeal. The City Manager responded that the State Lands would still want to make sure that their five requirements are met in the EIR and addendum, so they will have to contact the City to resolve the matter, it would have to go to the Planning Commission, and essentially back to the Council. Staff was asked to clarify if Council is sending the project back to the Planning Commission, then what is the Council asking them to do. City Attorney Thompson responded that the Planning Commission would be looking at a revised project and that they will be looking at all aspects of this project. Staff was also asked to confirm that Council tonight is not judging on the merits of the project. Ms. Thompson confirmed and stated that the primary function of the Planning Commission is to review the project in total. She further stated that the City Council isn't required to send it back, but may want to because the Commission didn't see all of the components of the project. Therefore, according to the same Council Member, this does not mean that more EIR work needs to be done, but rather the Planning Commission to look at the project and that a remand does not mean that additional impacts are required. Instead, this means that the Planning Commission needs to look at it anew. As part of this discussion it was mentioned that hat typically the Planning Commission reviews the Environmental Impact and all information is included in the EIR to protect the City, the developers, and the community. Therefore, she opined that it is in the best interest for the staff to review the EIR and provide any necessary information needed for the State Lands Commission. Council inquired what part of the revised project will need more focus or less focus. City Attorney Thompson stated that the addendum to the EIR is still under review, and the Planning Commission will again be looking at the entire EIR analysis to make determination of what has been completed. It was her opinion that it would benefit the City, community, and the developers if the State Lands Commission received all information that they require and requested. The time frame for the additional analysis was discussed. Dr. Bell responded that the staff has been working with the State Lands and they do not move quickly. One Council Member also addressed the comments about leadership and made it clear that the Council had not "passed the buck". In addition, she added details about the delays in the process. She also urged staff to ask CITY COUNCIL May 6, 2013 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 8 MINUTE BOOK Page No. 349