New Search
Comments and Responses, September 27, 2000 Public Hearing in Springfield <br />T29.6-The draft EIS states that <br />the Riverfront site has a lower <br />percentage of impervious surface <br />area than the Chiquita (formerly <br />Agripac), EWEB, and Broadway <br />sites (Alternatives 2, 4, and 5); for <br />this reason the draft EIS addresses <br />the long-term project impacts on <br />the Riverfront site separately. The <br />draft EIS concludes that the <br />proposed project would reduce the <br />amount of impervious surface area <br />at each of these four sites. The <br />draft EIS does not conclude that <br />selecting the Riverfront site would <br />result in a significant adverse <br />impact on water quality. The <br />draft EIS discusses the use of <br />mitigation measures to reduce <br />water quality impacts. <br />T29.7--Comment acknowledged. <br />T29.8-Comment acknowledged. <br />Transcript2 <br />48 <br />T29.6 t floinfl to coat a shadow of 80 to 90 foot in length. <br />coati. 2 Vou can site that buitdinfl in this river front <br />3 Oroyect and not cant a shadow on the northern developawnta <br />4 rsaldentialiy and You'11 cant vary little shadow on the Island <br />5 Park area, esoacially if you're dealihe with a aummar aolatice, <br />6 where Lhe sun is much hlflher in the sky and moves around maybe <br />7 aL 8:30 in Lhe morning will cast a ahatlow on the Dnrk, but by <br />e 9, it's not even close. <br />T29.8 9 8o I tlidn't know where that was cominfl from ae <br />10 I started Lo go through this caanentary. water resources. 1f <br />11 you look at lmpervtoua services. I think that your summary of <br />/2 impacts indicate that you were looking for a1flM ficant, <br />13 unavoidable. adverse impacts. <br />14 I tlon't think that you have any aianiftcant <br />16 unvoidable impacts, edverae lmpacta on the river front s1te. <br />16 If you IOOk at Mater resources. you've pot this merveloua <br />17 opportunity to Baal with btoawaioc and connections to ftankinfl <br />18 support areas theL your other metropolitan urban sizes do not <br />19 pose. I moan they do not have Lhnt ao n resource option. <br />~g,~ 2D If you look et the social economic berwfit. <br />21 thsre'a no other site LhnL will rosily manifaat in away the <br />22 critical change that you will make LO Lhe metropolitan area by <br />23 81L1nfl on the river front 81te. <br />T2fl.8124 If you look at historic preaervetion. I think <br />26 Lhat ono would hays to oak questions about Lhe nature of the <br />Final E!S 274 New Federal Courthouse <br />