What protects neighborhoods without site-specific SEPA review?
Kyle Madsen of the Plan Commission asks Planning Director Spencer Gardner what will protect habitat, trees, and neighborhoods once projects are exempt from site-specific SEPA review.
“How will the city ensure that wildlife habitat, tree cover, traffic congestion, other environmental concerns are adequately addressed or protected in instances where we would no longer be going through the SEPA process?”
Clip transcript
Automatic captions, formatted for reading.
Question: I've got a couple of questions, but first, I think there was a lot of interest and concern, I think, on the SEPA exemption expansion. And I would just like for, I think, my benefit and hopefully the public benefit, to ask the question to maybe Spencer and or Tirrell to explain, or can you elaborate the justification for the proposed expansion of SEPA exemptions? And as a part of that, how will the city ensure that wildlife habitat, tree cover, traffic congestion, other environmental concerns are adequately addressed or protected in instances where we would no longer be going through the SEPA process?
Answer: So we have slides that we haven't prepared today, but we have talked in other fora about the proposed SEPA exemptions. As we've studied them, and we have studied them as part of this environmental impact statement, but we are not proposing to implement them through this environmental impact statement. So the adoption, the actual adoption of those exemptions would be a separate step that we take. And to the extent that there's further study needed, we would do that further study there. So we are absolutely considering all those topics in the environmental impact statement. As we look at those SEPA exemptions, if there are specific areas or specific topics that we don't feel are adequately addressed in the environmental impact statement, we can address those in the process of adopting. And as we've looked at those exemptions, we've actually separated them into what we... I can't remember the term we had, but essentially two phases. Mm-hmm. The first phase is focused more on central city and already established inner neighborhoods where there's less concern about some of the impacts related to new development. And then a second phase that would cover the remaining portions of the city, some of which aren't as developed and where those impacts may be more significant. SoWe have anticipated further study of those things. At this time, of course, that's not proposed and on the table for consideration. But yes, it is something that we have kept an eye on through this environmental impact statement process. Can I ask another question?