To expand on Lisa McDonald's point about the developer paying for the
environmental studies, here's a story from Star Tribune archives:
Steve Brandt/Star Tribune
Paper: STAR TRIBUNE (Mpls.-St. Paul) Newspaper of the Twin Cities
Headline: Environmental impact studies disputed // Critics allege that
they favor developers
Date: 07/05/89
Section: NEWS
Page: 01B
Edition: METRO
Byline: Mike Kaszuba; Staff Writer
Length: 39.0
Subject: environment;law;building;development
Slug: EAW05
When the 18-story River Road Apartments complex was proposed inside
Minneapolis' largest historic district, state historical experts
complained the project would lead to a wall of tall buildings along
the
Mississippi River and have an "avoidable adverse effect" on the area.
The city's Heritage Preservation Commission, sharing the same
concern, withheld a building permit for River Road. Robert Roscoe, the
commission's chair, derisively referred to River Road as "a section of
the Berlin Wall." But city officials, using an environmental
assessment work sheet
(EAW) prepared by River Road's developer, concluded the project "does
not have the potential for significant environmental effects." The
city
added: "City plans along the riverfront encourage additional
residential, as well as commercial development." The developer, in an
appeal, was granted a building permit. The episode dramatized the
role - critics say the lack of it -
played by the environmental assessment on development projects. For
15
years, the environmental assessment work sheet and the more demanding
environmental impact statement (EIS) have been the cornerstone of a
state-mandated attempt to review virtually every major development
project in Minnesota for its impact on the environment. Since 1974,
nearly 1,500 environmental assessments and impact statements have
been
done on everything ranging from the Metrodome to a sanitary sewer
system near Prior Lake to a 659-foot TV tower in St. Paul. But
increasingly, environmentalists and citizens' groups complain
the two documents favor developers and don't consider seriously
legitimate environmental concerns. In Minneapolis, where 58
assessments
and impact statements have been done since the mid-1970s, consultants
hired by the developer now routinely prepare the documents. "It's a
great law on paper," said Richard Duncan, who chairs the
Sierra Club's legal committee in Minnesota. Sierra Club lobbyists
played key roles in putting the two documents into law in the 1970s.
"But the governmental units aren't doing their jobs, they're passing
it
off," he said. "The EAWs (particularly) are a bad joke." One of
the more extreme cases occurred in December near
International Falls, where a developer proposed a 12-unit condominium
on private land inside Voyageur's National Park. A four-page
environmental assessment prepared by Koochiching County officials
concluded the project would have no significant environmental impact
on
the national park. The document at one point asked: Will the project
cause the impairment or destruction of scenic views and vistas . . .
(or) other unique resources? County officials simply checked a box
marked "No." "There was virtually nothing addressed about . . .
compatibility
with surrounding land uses," complained Richard Frost, acting
superintendent of Voyageur's National Park. A National Park Service
report called the assessment "seriously deficient and incomplete" and
the project was challenged in court in March by a citizens' group.
Said
Frost: "What's lacking are some tighter guidelines on what is an
adequate EAW." While acknowledging the shortcomings, many
government officials
say the purpose of the two documents often is misunderstood and they
blame citizens' groups and environmentalists for using them merely to
delay and scuttle legitimate development projects. Government
officials
argue the documents were only intended to be "an informational tool"
that by themselves cannot - and should not - decide whether a project
should be built. And, while agreeing most studies are written by
consultants hired by the developer, many government officials said
they
retain the final authority on what the document will say. "Neither
an EAW or an EIS really says anything about whether a
project should be approved. It says, `If a project is built, this is
what will likely happen,' " said Gregg Downing of the Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board. The board oversees the environmental
review process in Minnesota, where the documents only rarely have had
the effect of stopping a project. "It shouldn't allow the process to
be
used to slow things up," said Downing. Even consultants who work
closely with citizens' groups say some
groups oversimplify the complexities of an environmental assessment or
impact statement. "It's a `Don't confuse me with the facts' attitude,"
said John Shardlow, a Minneapolis-based consultant on city planning
who
has worked with neighborhood groups. "I think . . . there's a real
tendency to boil down complicated development projects to a few key
issues." Added Walter Rockenstein, a former Minneapolis City
Council
member: "People think, in either an EAW or EIS, if you find there are
environmental impacts then that project cannot go on. That is just
dead
wrong." Since leaving the City Council six years ago, Rockenstein
has
become a leading consultant to developers on environmental assessments
and impact statements. Rockenstein and his law firm, Faegre & Benson,
have helped prepare environmental documents on among others the
Norwest
Tower, Lincoln Centre, City Center phase II and the proposed Uptown
Village projects in Minneapolis. Some citizens' groups say they are
frustrated that the documents
do not carry more weight. They also complain that government
officials
and developers misleadingly hold them up as impartial assessments of
environmental impact. "It seems like if there's a discussion of a
project (in the
neighborhood) somebody's always saying, `Hey, don't they have to do an
EIS?' - as if that's going to be the savior," said Steve Pundt, who
headed the now-defunct Calhoun Isles Community Organization. He
unsuccessfully lobbied city officials in 1984 to do an environmental
impact statement on the Lake Calhoun Condominium project. In St.
Paul, where city officials have overseen the completion of
at least 25 environmental assessments and two impact statements since
1974, one official indicated responsibility for the documents is
somewhat less than a top priority. "It's sort of the stepchild of the
department. Whoever is newest gets it," said Mark Filipi, a new city
planner who has recently prepared several environmental assessments.
For citizens, the two studies pose some inherent obstacles. If a
city decides, after doing an environmental assessment, that a more
stringent impact statement is unnecessary, a citizens' group has 30
days to appeal the decision to district court. But a developer can
start construction during the 30-day period, which leaves judges
reluctant to stop a project that is underway, critics say. Ever
since a 1980 change in the law, citizens can no longer
petition directly for an impact statement. But while citizens can
launch a court challenge to a finding that an impact statement is
unnecessary, very few environmental assessments lead to an impact
statement - in Minnesota, only three since since 1982. The contrast
in detail between an environmental assessment and an
impact statement is usually great. A standard environmental
assessment
form, which is four pages long, has 29 questions - many of which
require only "yes" or "no" answers. An impact statement, which can be
several hundred pages, often contains detailed traffic and air quality
analysis. A full-scale impact statement on a major downtown
Minneapolis
project, according to Rockenstein, can cost a developer as much as
$100,000. For consultants, getting hired by a developer to do an
environmental assessment or impact statement can mean walking a fine
line between trying to satisfy the developer and retaining their
impartiality. "The EIS and EAWs are strictly informational," said
consultant David Braslau, generally regarded as the leading
environmental consultant on most of downtown Minneapolis' major
developments. But he added: "To be sure, you don't go out of your way
to come up with something that is negative." Other consultants
agree. "I think there's probably definitely an
attempt to try to find out what it takes to make a project work,
instead of (focusing on) why it won't work," said David Koski of
Barton-Aschman Associates Inc., another leading local consultant.
Barton-Aschman prepared the environmental assessment and a
still-disputed traffic study on the controversial Calhoun Beach
Apartments project near Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis. Koski is the
former Minneapolis city traffic engineer. The dilemma can have
other impacts. When the 4,400-member MPLS
citizens' group searched for its own consultant to challenge the
Calhoun Beach Apartments environmental assessment, many turned the
group down. "A lot of them who worked for developers did not seem to
want to rock the boat," said Katherine Christianson, MPLS' executive
director. The studies, meanwhile, continue to be at the center of
many
development controversies. Only last week, the Minnesota Court of
Appeals ruled that a proposed $19 million solid waste incinerator in
Winona needed a supplemental environmental impact statement. The court
said the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), which issued a
permit for the incinerator, didn't consider seriously using an
existing
garbage facility in nearby La Crosse, Wis. "Obviously," said
Raymond Haik, the Minneapolis attorney for the
incinerator's chief opponents, "(we) felt the PCA, by refusing to look
at the La Crosse option, was not doing a very good job
environmentally."
Previous Next
Return to Hitlist
Return to Search Screen
Change Document Display
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
