Laserfiche WebLink
Lathrop stated that the access to Lot 5 is Taylor Avenue. He questioned whether there <br />should be access through the existing buildings in order to accommodate whatever is on <br />Lot 5. <br /> <br />West replied that they have potentially provided for that need. He stated that they have <br />agreed that the drive connection is subject to review in communication with the PUD <br />application for Lot 5. He explained that the plat also includes a proposed secondary <br />access emergency easement that connects with Lot 5. <br /> <br />Lathrop asked for clarification that the detention pond is designed for Lots 2, 3, and 4 but <br />not Lot 5. <br /> <br />West replied, yes. <br /> <br />Mayer moved that Council approve Resolution No. 35, Series 1999 - A Resolution <br />Approving a Final Subdivision Replat and Final PUD Development Plan for Lots 2, 3, 4 <br />and 5, Block 2, The Business Center at CTC, Replat B with the additional condition that <br />the middle building contain the provision for two additional bay doors within the zone, <br />seconded by Sisk. <br /> <br />Sam Light, City Attorney, offered a friendly amendment that the motion proposed by <br />Councilman Mayer be added as the 'now therefore'clause on page two of the Resolution, <br />which was erroneously omitted. <br /> <br />Friendly amendment accepted by Mayer and Sisk. <br /> <br />Bill Simmons, City Administrator, asked West if the original application contained the <br />two additional bay doors and they were removed. <br /> <br />West replied that they weren't removed, he stated that he felt there was confusion as to <br />the number of zones on each building. He admitted that he did not clearly communicate <br />that there were two zones on the north building and three zones each on the other two <br />buildings. He explained that he did not press the issue, as there were so many items being <br />discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Simmons requested whether the Planning Commission took action to remove the doors <br />from the middle building. <br /> <br />West replied, no, he did not believe so. He admitted that the Planning Commission did <br />raise a new issue that night, which limited the number of doors on each building. He did <br />not feel that they were singling out any particular building due to visual concerns. <br /> <br />Simmons asked West for a color board demonstrating the color for the doors. <br /> <br />West replied that they normally match the body of the building, which in this case would <br />be the darker color on the board. <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br /> <br />