Laserfiche WebLink
find that the City is not paying attention or doing their share. The belief appears to be that someone <br />else, other than the businesses, should pay for all downtown customers to park. He stated that Council <br />is trying to be proactive rather than waiting for downtown residents to begin asking for residential <br />parking permits. <br /> <br />Mayer asked to contribute to Davidson's comments. He stated that he takes offense at the statement <br />that Council has shown some inaction. He stated that there are five councilmembers in attendance <br />tonight who initiated funding for the downtown improvement project, which has expended almost four <br />million dollars on downtown. The consultant involved in the Design Guidelines project, Nor6 Winter, <br />remarked that he has not seen any other city where the taxpayers have solely funded an improvement <br />project like this one. In addition to that, according to Mayer, the City has spent a lot of taxpayer money <br />to handle drainage issues for downtown. He concluded by stating that he does not believe you could <br />find another city that has expended taxpayer funds on its downtown commercial district without <br />asking anything in return. He did not feel that the current project was based on personalities or current <br />tenants. He commended Erik Hartronft on the changes he has made to the project. He agreed that there <br />is an equity issue with other property owners. He also did not feel the current parking ratio was fair. <br />He apologized to the Ruskus' for the difficulty they have faced and assured them it was due to Council <br />being faced with some very difficult issues. <br /> <br />Keany asked Hartronft what signage guidelines are proposed for this project. <br /> <br />Hartronft replied that they have indicated where signage would be allowed, square footage, etc., that <br />is consistent with the Commercial Design Guidelines and with the City's sign ordinance. <br /> <br />Keany agreed with the applicant's request to remove condition number one and to strike the last <br />sentence from condition number two. <br /> <br />Howard stated he has several concerns. He likes the project however, he does not like the politics <br />associated with it. He read the following statements made by the applicant from an article in the local <br />paper:"The Council was asleep at the wheel. They knew we had a parking issue that had to be looked <br />at and just didn't do it. I've spent a lot of time and money. To tell me, a private person who is willing <br />to invest a million dollars in downtown, no, would be crazy. Parking is not my responsibility, bottom <br />line." He replied that it is everybody's responsibility. He stated that he did not want to see this in the <br />newspaper, especially since the applicant has agreed to work with Council on parking. He expressed <br />support for the project with the exception of the last sentence in condition number two, which he <br />would strike. <br /> <br />Levihn stated that he is concemed with the fact that the applicant was not aware this project would <br />be subject to the Commercial Design Guidelines until recently. He agreed that parking is an issue <br />downtown. He was hesitant to approve this project until the issues such as parking and building height <br />are resolved. <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br /> <br />