Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Trees Traffic topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge finalizing tree ordinance; neighbors raise safety concerns about Second Street redesign
Summary
During public comment at the May 5 study session, residents urged the council to complete the long‑pending tree ordinance and tree master plan and voiced opposition to the proposed closure and traffic changes near Second Street and Munson Lane.
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Trees Traffic topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several members of the public spoke during the May 5 study session. Their comments raised two distinct, substantive concerns: completing the city’s tree ordinance and potential safety/access impacts from proposed changes at the Second Street/Munson Lane area.
Tree ordinance and master plan: Bill (representing community interests) and Amy Lykover (Bridal Park resident) told the council the tree ordinance revision has been in progress for years and urged staff and council to advance completion. Bill noted the city’s sustainability goals and said tree preservation and a tree master plan are necessary to reach sequestration targets; Amy said the phrase “tree” did not appear in the draft goals and called for the ordinance and policy work to be prioritized.
Second Street intersection and Munson Lane concerns: Victoria Dewitt, a Fremont Road resident, opposed proposed changes that would close westbound Munson Lane from Second to Marquardt/Weston and said the design would divert roughly 300 vehicles to other intersections without planned capacity or safety improvements. Dewitt said the proposed plan risks creating uncontrolled crossings at Marquardt where a signal currently provides traffic control and called for additional analysis and safety measures.
Staff response and next steps: City staff acknowledged receipt of the comments and said they will consider these priorities during the forthcoming prioritization, work‑plan and CIP exercises. Staff noted that the goals document is intended as a policy framework and that detailed project timing, grant deadlines and trade‑offs will be assessed when projects move into the implementation phase. No formal council action was taken on either public comment topic during the session.

