My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2018 11 27
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2018 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2018 11 27
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:35 PM
Creation date
12/19/2018 10:37:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2018 11 27
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />November 27 2018 <br />Page 5 of 12 <br />DISCUSSION/DIRECTION — DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE CONCEPTUAL <br />DESIGN <br />Mayor Muckle noted this is an opportunity for the City Council to give feedback on <br />options for parking in downtown. The Council did receive a request from the members <br />of the Revitalization Commission to continue this item. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated she would like to discuss this tonight as it is on the <br />agenda. Many members of the public are interested in this and we owe it to them to <br />consider this and discuss it. This should not be dragged out further She stated she has <br />opposed and continues to oppose this project on the basis of three things: cost; short <br />and long-term need, including transportation technology changes; and neighborhood <br />character She stated there has been a parking issue downtown and Council has <br />addressed this by making significant investments by buying additional surface lots, <br />putting in time restrictions, doing better monitoring, and adding capacity She noted <br />parking is an issue in residential streets near offices, schools, and parks. She stated we <br />need to determine if we are interested in this or not and we should move on and not <br />waste time on this if the answer is no. <br />Councilmember Loo stated she does support the request for a continuance, traditionally <br />we have always honored such requests. She stated she sees no reason to depart from <br />that tradition; she supports continuing to January 22. <br />Councilmember Leh concurred with Councilmember Loo. In a small town we can make <br />such allowances for board members who may not be able to attend a Council meeting. <br />It is worthwhile to continue it for that reason. There is no time rush on this. <br />Councilmember Maloney stated Councilmember Stolzmann has a good point; <br />sometimes we postpone things too long. He stated in this case, however we have an <br />applicant who has asked for a postponement and we should respect the wishes of the <br />applicant. When we do discuss this in January we should be very clear about what our <br />interest and intent is. <br />Mayor Muckle stated he supports the continuance. He stated he supported the study to <br />see what this structure would look like. Having seen the designs now he doesn't see <br />how any of the structures are going to have an appearance of small-town character He <br />supports the continuance to January 22 so the LRC can present. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated she does not feel items should be continued for the <br />illness of an applicant. She does not support delaying this for two months; if it is to be <br />delayed she would like it to be heard in the next few weeks. <br />Mayor Muckle stated January 22 was chosen to avoid the holidays but other dates can <br />be considered. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.