Laserfiche WebLink
DRAFT <br /> an office. Outdoor entertainment in residential areas needs a buffer; it should be <br /> conditioned with no outside music on that plaza because it is directly across from <br /> residences. If this were totally in compliance with all the ideas and work that <br /> went into planning the Downtown area before, it would not need a change in land <br /> use or amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan. <br /> Mr. Shaper stated that in-lieu parking fees may help the City, but it does not do anything <br /> for the parking problems that are key in the Downtown. He pointed out that it does not <br /> consider the quality of life and what people are going to be living with forever. He <br /> added that this is not a very satisfactory solution for those who live in the middle of all of <br /> this. <br /> Mr. Shaper stated that with respect to procedures, he did not hear about this project <br /> until he got the yellow notice card last week as a resident within 1,000 feet of the project <br /> site. He noted that clearly, a great deal of time, effort, and money have gone into <br /> working on this, and by the time public input is requested, the project is a done deal. He <br /> noted that everybody is financially timed and emotionally attached to all the work that <br /> has been done with Planning. He requested that the community and the neighborhood <br /> be informed and involved early in the process where there really is the potential for <br /> meaningful input and exchange. <br /> Mr. Bowers stated that he would like to address the issue of parking and that they do <br /> not have on-site parking for their commercial project. He indicated that at a recent <br /> workshop, the City Council talked about parking, and the City has responded in great <br /> fashion to try and alleviate some of those conditions by having additional striping on <br /> First Street, enforcing the three-hours parking on Main Street, and paving the DeMolay <br /> lot for an additional 46 parking spaces about a block away from this project site. These <br /> would alleviate the parking issues and would be very beneficial for the businesses on <br /> this side of town. <br /> Commissioner Ritter referred to the commercial zoning of the main house and asked <br /> Mr. Bower if they were asking that it also have the option of being residential. <br /> Mr. Bowers replied that they would love to see that be retail, a restaurant, a wine bar, or <br /> a coffee shop, but when the economy goes south, a residential use would give them the <br /> flexibility and the option to get a short-term tenant in there for six months to a year. He <br /> noted that the tenants they have been leasing to have been divorced single moms who <br /> are transitional or people looking for temporary places in which to live while their home <br /> in Ruby Hill is being remodeled. He added that putting an office user there could be a <br /> three- to five-year deal, as opposed to the residential user, which would have the vitality <br /> back there in nine months or a year. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Commissioner Ritter asked staff for more information on the building that is being <br /> remodeled right next door to this project. <br /> Mr. Weinstein replied that the building is a 1960's- or 1970's-era building that does not <br /> relate well to the street and does not promote pedestrian vitality. He indicated that the <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 11/182015 Page 7 of 22 <br />