My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes 1992 0406
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1992
>
Minutes 1992 0406
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2014 4:57:40 PM
Creation date
1/14/2014 4:57:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Minutes
Document Date (6)
4/6/1992
Retention
PERM
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Minutes - San Leandro City Council Meeting - April 6, 1992 Page - 27 - <br /> PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) <br /> create and this is not studied under the EIR. He referred to a number <br /> of comments in the EIR which he felt were not answered and said the EIR <br /> does not discuss impacts associated with future mitigation. He said no <br /> one will evaluate whether this is a true EIR. He asked if the "S" <br /> Overlay would be subjected to the same CEQA review regulations as the <br /> EIR and asked how the City Council could certify the EIR without <br /> knowing what the impact of the mitigation measures would be. <br /> Christine Scobee, 495 Fortuna Avenue, said no determination has been <br /> made on the impacts related to airport noise, transit, soil <br /> contamination, schools, and visual impacts. She said these concerns <br /> were not answered in the EIR. She asked what the rush was to approve <br /> a General Development Plan. She said the EIR evades questions or <br /> answers in generalities. She said a number of experts feel their <br /> questions were not answered in the EIR. She said the Overriding <br /> Considerations are ridiculous. She said $250,000 houses do not help <br /> the job/housing balance when jobs are only paying $5.00 an hour. She <br /> urged the City Council not to certify the EIR or to approve the <br /> project. She spoke regarding a law suit, Sunstrom vs. County of <br /> Mendocino, which she said had been mentioned in the East Bay Regional <br /> Park District letter. <br /> George Kurilko spoke regarding the Sundstrom lawsuit. He said it has <br /> been determined it is not applicable to this type of EIR because it <br /> related to a Negative Declaration. He said it has been superseded by <br /> Sacramento Old City Association vs. City of Sacramento. He said <br /> Sunstrom was written in response to a Negative Declaration; the <br /> Sacramento case was written in response to an EIR. He said the EIR <br /> reached the conclusion that there was potentially significant impact <br /> and then provided mitigation measures. <br /> Chuck Fugel , Plumbers' Local 444, 2960 Merced Street, said we should <br /> put America back to work, especially in the housing area. He said when <br /> housing goes the economy goes. He said this project is well designed <br /> and preserves and enhances the wetlands. He said each delay in <br /> starting building raises the costs and hurts affordable housing and he <br /> requested the City Council approve the project. <br /> Del Willburn, Training Director for the Plumbers' Apprenticeship <br /> School , 830 Linwood Way, said his school prepares young people for <br /> careers in plumbing. He said they want to see this project approved to <br /> give young people an opportunity to work here as well as live here, pay <br /> taxes, and help businesses. He said this project would help keep <br /> people in the community instead of commuting. He said the <br /> environmental concerns have been mitigated and Citation is giving extra <br /> to this quality project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.