Laserfiche WebLink
Wood stated that the Planning Commission approved both Phase I and II of the request on <br />November 14, 1995, with five conditions. Resolution No. 70 reflected three conditions which were <br />not addressed in response to the Planning Commission approval. He requested that the three notes <br />be added to the resolution as condition Nos. 4, 5, and 6. <br /> <br />Davidson called for the applicant's presentation. <br /> <br />Jack Rudd, architect, 954 Pearl Street, Boulder, Colorado 80302, stated that Sounds True is a <br />recording and distribution company. He reviewed the project. <br /> <br />Davidson called for Council comments or questions. <br /> <br />Sisk asked ifRudd would have any problem with the six conditions proposed in Resolution No. 70. <br />Rudd did not. <br /> <br />Lathrop wondered if by adopting this resolution the City would be absolving Sounds True or <br />subsequent owner of any responsibility for contributing to the cost of Cherry Street in the future. <br /> <br />Tom Phare, Public Works Director, felt there were potential ways that the City could still require the <br />abutting property owners to improve this street through other non-subdivision agreement provisions <br />of special improvement, law that allows communities to require public improvements. <br /> <br />Lathrop wanted to make sure that the applicant realized that someday that may be a contingent <br />liability to some degree. <br /> <br />Rudd was aware of that. <br /> <br />Davidson wanted the District contacted as to whether or not this street needed to be there. <br /> <br />Lathrop felt it was a non-issue and it should be left alone. <br /> <br />Howard moved that Council approve Resolution No. 70, Series 1995, for Sounds True, Inc. with all <br />of the conditions staff gave. <br /> <br />Rudd clarified that this was for approval of both Phase I and II. <br /> <br />Wood stated that the resolution from the Planning Commission was specifically for both phases and <br />had been reviewed for parking, landscape coverage, building coverage. He saw no reason to bring <br />it back. <br /> <br />Howard amended his motion adding that the note from the PUD be removed that stated that Phase <br />II must be reviewed. Seconded by Sisk. All in favor with Levihn being absent. <br /> <br /> <br />