Laserfiche WebLink
Discussion included calculation of the parking spaces; noting that part of the impervious surface <br />� discussion was driven by City Code; the applicant's enlarging the parking lot islands to provide <br />� more green space; the applicant's allotment at a minimal level over City Code (4 spaces); need to <br />� avoid cars from the office building parking on residential streets; and typical process for <br />: development of a storm water management plan after the concept plan and before final approval. <br />: Councilmember Pust suggested that, as a policy discussion, further discussion be held in the <br />: future as to the standards for parking stalls, which had been developed in the 1970s, and may <br />: need further review and potential revision in today's reality and with other methods of <br />: transportation available. <br />: Councilmember Ihlan suggested that, as a policy matter, the City Council consider issues, such <br />: as storm water management, at the concept level approval. <br />: Councilmember Johnson advised that he conducted his own on-site review of site lines and <br />: driveway access related to the sidewalk and his safety concerns for pedestrians and bicycles, and <br />: strongly suggested formal signage for the site prior to final approval. <br />E Councilmember Roe addressed lot coverage, in his review of aerials of the site and the existing <br />E bank use, and opined that the proposed coverage would be similar overall. Councilmember Roe <br />E concurred with the safety concerns on site and pedestrians and bicycles using the sidewalk. <br />E Roll Call <br />E Ayes: Roe; Johnson; Pust; and Klausing. <br />E Nays:Ihlan. <br />� Motion carried. <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />