Laserfiche WebLink
first got involved, they were given an alignment from the City. He commented that Ms. Pearson <br /> commented that she did not want Riverdale Drive to go through her living room and staff was <br /> great with providing alternative ideas for the alignment that do not go through the Pearson's home <br /> or Bowers Drive. He stated that there were neighborhood meetings for Pearson Place which <br /> brought forward Riverdale Drive alternative one. He stated that the road alignment could be <br /> moved to the east, which would be almost a football field from Bowers Drive. He explained that <br /> the Pearsons prefer that alignment because the road impacts the Pearsons and their home along <br /> with their businesses. He stated that the Pearsons do not want to have a service road. <br /> Mayor LeTourneau stated that the additional feedback is important as it tells the City there are <br /> many things still on the table. He stated that there is flexibility in those topics. <br /> Councilmember Riley noted that each member of the Council had different ideas on some elements <br /> and asked for input from staff, as he was unsure the draft motion captures those ideas. <br /> Mayor LeTourneau commented that the framework allows for all of those discussion points to <br /> come forward. He stated that the framework was not very clear about the idea of extended tree <br /> preservation and suggested that be added. <br /> Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that everyone agrees that Riverdale Drive is important <br /> and both alternatives should be explored deeper. He commented that the second connection <br /> between Riverdale Drive and Bowers Drive needs to happen, whether that is a public road or just <br /> for public safety. He provided details on the possible tree preservation options as well. He noted <br /> that the framework would provide direction and limit some options compared to the things that <br /> have been on the table thus far. <br /> Motion by Councilmember Menth, seconded by Councilmember Kuzma, to Adopt Resolution <br /> #20-136 Approving Planning Framework Document for Riverstone South, including the <br /> discussion related to tree preservation. <br /> Further discussion: Councilmember Heinrich asked what the language would be related to tree <br /> preservation. Councilmember Menth confirmed that he would suggest the language as proposed <br /> by staff Councilmember Specht stated that he likes the idea of no park fees with the higher acreage <br /> of preserved trees. Councilmember Heinrich stated that she struggles because one of the options <br /> is continuing to explore 20 plus acres of tree preservation. She stated that she would like to work <br /> with the developer on a tree preservation plan but was unsure that acquisition of 20 plus acres <br /> would be feasible. She commented that there are a lot of variables included in the language <br /> provided by staff Mayor LeTourneau stated that the intent is to provide direction and to let staff <br /> and the developer work out those details. He stated that full acquisition of the trees would most <br /> likely fall off the discussion pretty quickly as this moves forward. Councilmember Heinrich stated <br /> that she cannot support the motion as drafted which includes the full acquisition of the 20 plus <br /> acres of wooded area. Councilmember Menth stated that he understands that this would provide <br /> direction to the staff to negotiate and work with the developer. He commented that anything <br /> between one acre and 23 acres would be on the table for discussion and simply provides flexibility. <br /> Deputy City Administrator Gladhill offered an amendment to move this along. He stated that <br /> unless the Council is willing to bring cash, the full acquisition would not happen and therefore <br /> City Council/June 23,2020 <br /> Page 19 of 21 <br /> 1 <br />