It sounds to me like the people who are in charge of the 35W access project know that the environmental impact is not positive, and that an Environmental Impact Statement is unlikely "justify" the project, in the sense of showing a positive, neutral, or even a slightly negative environmental impact.
If an EIS statement is done, and it looks like the environmental impact is actually positive, I would probably support it. Why the hell not? >From the information that I've gleaned from this list, opposition to the 35W access forced supporters of the project to retreat, and to propose to do the project in small enough segments that an Environmental Impact Statement would not be required. There evidently is a significant difference between an EIS and an Environmental Impact Worksheet. The EIS involves more comprehensive assessment over which the developer has less control. The 35W access project not only needs approval from the MN Pollution Control Agency, it needs the support of the Minneapolis City Council. And opponents of the project are looking into filing a lawsuit to require an EIS for the project. In my opinion, the City Council should oppose the 35W access project, and reconsider their position only if a full EIS is done. Certainly Dean Z and the other council members who favor a Personal Rapid Transit system ought to vote against 35W access project. The money being spent to fix the current system would be better spent on developing a more environmentally friendly way to move people around. -Doug Mann, King Field http://educationright.tripod.com In a message dated 1/27/2004 12:54:55 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > If they want it, they'll build it, the 35W Access Project. To accommodate > development and major corporations like Allina. > > There is no such thing as an objective Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) > or an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). These two documents are > designed *not* to measure the environmental impact of large and small > development projects. They're designed to justify them. > > Demanding an EAW and/or an EIS is a fruitless exercise. The MPCA has never - > get that? - *never* refused to issue a permit for a potential polluter, > whether they've conducted an EIS/EAW or not. 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
