Laserfiche WebLink
Lathrop moved that Council approve Resolution No. 49, Series 1999 - A Resolution <br />Approving a Special Review Use and Final PUD Development Plan for the Overlook <br />Restaurant on Lots 3 and 4, Block 1, the Business Center at CTC with the twelve <br />conditions of approval brought forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 35, Series <br />1999, including the tower element per the revision number two, dated 5/28/99, seconded <br />by Mayer. <br /> <br />Mayer offered a friendly amendment to include the requirement to provide a minimum of <br />100 parking spaces through cross parking agreements, and that Arthur Avenue be signed <br />with 'no parking' signs within 100 yards on either side of the applicant's lot lines. <br /> <br />Lathrop accepted the cross-parking agreement however he questioned whether the no <br />parking zone would be necessary with the cross parking agreement in place. <br /> <br />Mayer explained that even with a cross parking agreement to provide additional parking <br />spaces, if the street is more accessible and not signed as 'no parking', patrons will park <br />there. <br /> <br />Sisk suggested that if parking became an issue, the City would be in a position to install <br />'no parking' signs along Arthur Avenue. <br /> <br />Mayer agreed with Sisk and withdrew the 'no parking' portion of his friendly <br />amendment. <br /> <br />Lathrop accepted the friendly amendment regarding the cross-parking agreement. <br /> <br />Sisk offered a friendly amendment that cross parking agreements are secured for a <br />minimum of 100 parking spaces prior to the recording of the PUD. <br /> <br />Friendly amendment was accepted by Mayer and Lathrop. <br /> <br />Simmons asked Schneider for clarification on the height of the tower element. <br /> <br />Schneider replied fifty feet. <br /> <br />Light asked to clarify that the draft resolution included in the Council packet would have <br />required that the cross parking agreements be in place prior to the issuance of any <br />building permits but the friendly amendment is that those be in place prior to the <br />recording of the PUD. He explained that this change would be consistent with Council <br />actions for Century Retail and other projects that have cross parking agreements. He <br />asked Wood for clarification that if the tower element is added back in, there would be a <br />condition from the Planning Commission list that would need to be included. He <br />explained that condition number nine of Planning Commission Resolution No. 35 which <br />reads That no exterior lighting of the tower be allowed, and that interior lighting in the <br />tower shall be limited to the minimum necessary for the reasonable use of the stairwell is <br />not included in the resolution currently before Council. <br /> <br />24 <br /> <br /> <br />