Laserfiche WebLink
Commission meeting. He stated that stadium continues to be mentioned but the school is viewing <br /> this as field space for soccer and football and the area will not be programmed to the high level <br /> that Central Park i s. <br /> Board Member Fetterley commented that there are lots of things happening with the planning of <br /> this plot and the school use. She stated that in looking at this from the normal objective of the <br /> Board, specific to plantings and trees, she does not love the plan to remove large trees with <br /> replacement by small trees and/or restitution. She stated that she would prefer to see more trees <br /> preserved or planted on the school site, rather than spreading more onto Central Park. <br /> Board Member Arts agreed with those comments. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson stated that it is not uncommon to see adjustments to the number or <br /> quantity of trees on a plan. He stated that the Board could recommend that the required number <br /> of plantings be accommodated on site,but there has to be consideration that it would be hard to fit <br /> that number of trees without impacting growth characteristics therefore it could be helpful to allow <br /> additional planting on Central Park property. He stated that the trees could be strategically placed <br /> in attempt to mitigate concerns raised. <br /> Board Member Fetterley stated that the project is working well to meet the guidelines of the City. <br /> She stated that they can advocate for trees and the environment the best they can but must consider <br /> the rules in place as well. <br /> Board Member Hiatt asked if there is a timeline on the reports from engineering and the <br /> LRRWMO, as that watershed issue is a key piece in this discussion. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson replied that the City staff review should be wrapped up later this week <br /> to prepare for the public hearing that will be conducted by the Planning Commission. He noted <br /> that after that meeting, the case would be sent to the LRRWMO. He stated that the wetland <br /> delineation has been submitted to the LRRWMO for review as well. <br /> Board Member Hiatt asked if the City considers stormwater retention an issue in this area currently. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson replied that the stormwater management staff person is out of the office, <br /> therefore is he unsure if those photos are common. He stated that he does not doubt the statements <br /> of the residents but cannot confirm that either without that staff person. <br /> Board Member Fetterley referenced the comments related to improvements to 161 St and asked for <br /> details on that potential project. <br /> Senior Planner Anderson replied that if this project is the premise to need to widen 161 St, that <br /> would fall as a cost to the developer. He stated that the project is in the CIP for a reconstruction <br /> for 2024. He stated that there are discussions to perhaps move that to a 2023 project to better <br /> correspond with the timing of this project. He stated that improvements that would be needed <br /> because of the project (turn lanes, widening, trails) would be a cost of the developer. He stated <br />