City Council Minutes 1999 03 02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

it back to the Planning Commission with the direction to rebuild it as a two-story building. Levihn agreed with Mayer on parking. He agreed with Keany on the visual appeal of the three-story building. He questioned whether Council should vote on the proposal in light of the fact that the applicant is taking a chance on what Council will decide at their March 16, 1999 meeting. Davidson stated that the bed & breakfast proposal fully met parking requirements. He explained that the parking requirements vary according to the type of establishment. Hartronft questioned whether there is an employee-parking requirement. Davidson replied he believes there is. He agreed with Keany & Levihn on the visual appeal of the three-story building. He commended Hartronft on the design of the building. He explained that there is no current City requirement for two parking spaces per 1,000 sf or one per 500 sf for restaurants. He stated that there is a first reading ordinance and until the public hearing is actually held and Council votes, no one can predict what's going to happen. He questioned how anyone, including himself, could predict how Council will vote. He was unclear on what happened to the diagonal parking proposal, as he recalled that there were several members on Council in favor of it. Wood replied that the concern with diagonal parking is that angled parking on Walnut Street causes the drive widths in the right-of-way to become too narrow. Davidson replied that Walnut Street is not a through street and, therefore, the traffic speed would be slower. He questioned how narrow the drive width would become. Wood replied that Walnut Street is seen as an important link between Front & Main. Davidson questioned who determined that. Tom Phare, Public Works Director, stated that the Walnut, Front & Spruce Streets system is necessary, given the given the amount of activity at Pine & Front Streets. It can be converted to parking; however, it can't function as both a street and a parking lot. He agreed with Wood that there is a much more cost-effective opportunity on Front Street for on-street parking. Phare asked Hartronft for the number of additional parking spaces his proposal for Front Street generated. Hartronft provided copies of his proposal and replied that there were approximately sixty- five spaces. Davidson stated that he would prefer not to discuss a parking structure, as there is no proposal before Council for one. He felt that Walnut Street has sufficient width to provide parking. 19