Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2001 <br />PROJECT REVIEW <br />A. Ryan/Target Project Submittal (Item 1-01) — Wessel stated the application was <br />incomplete and Ryan has asked for a respite. He advised that a staff review of the plan <br />would be held the following day and the process would need to be renegotiated and the <br />regulatory process reinitiated. The new plan was to be smaller scale and they still wished <br />to break ground in July. At present the plan would be revised by April, with the <br />Environmental Board reviewing it at the March meeting. The response from the <br />community caused Target to drop the proposed three large commercial sites to the West. <br />The Target building would be moved over to the West of the initial site. There would be <br />six to eight smaller commercial sites with three to eight thousand square feet each. The <br />wetland would be left alone, and a strip north of 77th Street would remain undeveloped. <br />Wessel asked for comments on where to mitigate. <br />Trehus arrived at 6:40 p.m. <br />Donlin asked the number of parking spaces proposed, and was the swamp to remain <br />untouched. Wessel answered the number of parking spaces would be reduced, but he was <br />unclear by the number and did not know the plans concerning therea ofthe swamp. <br />Donlin asked if the plan proposed in March would be considered finished,:and approved. <br />Wessel responded typicallya project similar in scope ou1d re wire a gear togo through <br />p p j p ��yF� ,. �q My g <br />the planning stage, but for this project, it is a few moths:1( <br />y' <br />Chair Lanyon stated that they already know wht to expect from the Board, but the Board <br />could give additional comments. <br />Wessel noted if the project did not bre <br />discontinued. <br />group 'fg,n July, the project would be <br />Asleson mentioned that the huii1dirigNras mo ed over and the number of parking spaces <br />was reduced. <br />it <br />Mach indicated that�th ?ploth vas notrprotected and secure, and asked about the hydrology <br />if' r' <br />issues. Asleson e�xplainedhe hydrological issues were unknown, but the Watershed <br />District was dealing v lith them. <br />" rye , <br />Kukonen_ questioned f the business failed in the proposed location, what were their plans <br />'=r kiti+'�*Y <br />for the site c ould thebuilding be abandoned. Wessel answered the market studies were <br />important pir rg lince SuperTarget would compete with other nearby commercial <br />sites. <br />Trehus asked what was the responsibility of the City if the site was abandoned. <br />2 <br />