Laserfiche WebLink
�;� Discussion included calculation of the parking spaces; noting that part of the impervious surface <br />a� discussion was driven by City Code; the applicant's enlarging the parking lot islands to provide <br />aa more green space; the applicant's allotment at a minimal level over City Code (4 spaces); need to <br />a:� avoid cars from the office building parking on residential streets; and typical process for <br />�o development of a storm water management plan after the concept plan and before final approval. <br />s� Councilmember Pust suggested that, as a policy discussion, further discussion be held in the <br />52 future as to the standards for parking stalls, which had been developed in the 1970s, and may <br />s�s need further review and potential revision in today's reality and with other methods of <br />�� transportation available. <br />ss Councilmember Ihlan suggested that, as a policy matter, the City Council consider issues, such <br />sE as storm water management, at the concept level approval. <br />5T Councilmember Johnson advised that he conducted his own on-site review of site lines and <br />5� driveway access related to the sidewalk and his safety concerns for pedestrians and bicycles, and <br />53 strongly suggested formal signage for the site prior to final approval. <br />6o Councilmember Roe addressed lot coverage, in his review of aerials of the site and the existing <br />s� bank use, and opined that the proposed coverage would be similar overall. Councilmember Roe <br />s'? concurred with the safety concerns on site and pedestrians and bicycles using the sidewalk. <br />s.� Roll Call <br />s� Ayes: Roe; Johnson; Pust; and Klausing. <br />ss Nays:Ihlan. <br />sh Motion carried. <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />• , <br />