Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD -MEETING MARCH 28, 2001 <br />CITIZEN COMMENTS <br />No comments were made. <br />PROJECT REVIEW <br />A. Ryan/Target Update Review — Brian Wessel commented on the changes to the <br />plan. The three 30,000 sq. ft boxes were removed. The access remained the <br />same with no access to 77th Street. The present conceptual plan was presented <br />three weeks ago, and will not have an official plan until April 25, 2001. The plan <br />included 86,000 -sq. ft. with potential to expand, and off site mitigation similar to <br />the first plan. There was a meeting scheduled for Tuesday for staff review. <br />Donlin noted the plan appeared essentially impervious, and considered the revised <br />plan a step backward in terms of the goals of the Environmental Board. <br />Chair Lanyon pointed out that there were enough accommodations in Phase II to <br />gain support. He urged staff to address the runoff issues before the plans come to <br />the Board. <br />A te.4-• <br />Wessel indicated there had been a change in the groundbyealifig from July to <br />September. e <br />A, A, <br />Donlin expressed concern over the heavy irafficivhicliNrould be necessary to <br />support a large Target store. Wessel assured the Board that the two co-anchors <br />believed it was economically feasible. <br />Donlin questioned if there was inactetruateepport and a loss occurred, would the <br />building be abandoned. Wessel responded that not many Target buildings had <br />been abandoned. <br />• 4 . <br />(,00414. <br />Kukonen noted the store .in Coon Rapids had been abandoned, and <br />inquired if it was a terrible'lcurd8qtalie city of Coon Rapids. Wessel answered <br />dtqlf yY <br />„ <br />that Target had the mcist;solidt9pord of the big box stores. <br />Chair Lanyonidantifibalthe role of the Board was the environmental focus, and in <br />that Ryarigirsei*db8ktiacked, especially with the runoff mitigation issues. <br />44:4, <br />Mat noted the'oiite mitigation which was proposed in the plan. The first <br />pnorOAISrmipyosed to be on site mitigation, then off site mitigation. He then <br />asked aboutthe options they were considering. Wessel responded the County <br />Board was discussing the options, but nothing was decided. <br />Trehus asked for information concerning mitigation on existing park land. <br />Chair Lanyon agreed that they needed to clarify that option. <br />2 <br />