City Council Minutes 2018 03 20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes March 20, 2018 Page 13 of 19 project if we mess with architecture He asked for approval by Council for this project as presented. He thought the retail on the first floor could be achieved easily with a note. Charles Haseman, 247 S Lark Avenue, wondered why the office space was necessary downtown when there are empty office spaces in other parts of the city Cindy Bedell, 662 W Willow, didn't think downtown needed a boxy building that doesn't fit. She didn't want Council to be swayed by businesses threatening to move if this project is not approved as presented She suggested downsizing this project and preserving the character of historic downtown Applicant David Sinkey noted things change and the retail note could hamstring someone in the future. There is no plan to finish the basement space but it can function as storage There is also no intent to use the patio space for offices. Third story is designed to look like an add-on according to design guidelines The project is intended to be its own statement He asked for really concrete ideas if Council wishes to change the look. The bike spaces are depicted on the plan in the garage. He noted he will be offering Eco passes to employees. Erik Hartronft noted the parking spaces were based on what the City has done in the past as well as the patio space, based on Code. Downtown parking standards were set with the cross use in mind. Energy usage and daylighting were considered in the design. He was not opposed to continuing to work on the design. Mayor Muckle was interested in seeing an updated conceptual drawing. Councilmember Keany noted the applicant needed something more specific in regards to direction and noted design is subjective. Councilmember Stolzmann felt this should be remanded to the Planning Commission (PC) to address mass, scale and parking Councilmember Leh asked what the constraints on this might be. City Attorney Light noted this could be remanded to PC but that would shift where Council puts the comments and direction. The applicant could ask for a decision on the application as presented. Notice would have to be repeated if remanded to PC. Items to be focused on would need to be clear Councilmember Loo noted staff and PC had forwarded this to Council for approval. If this is sent back the expectation needs to be very clear. She did not want applicants to leave because of the process and the cost to their business.