18 ATTACH 05-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT Mr. Weinstein stated that staff is absolutely and definitely as cognizant as the Commission is of the parking issues Downtown; it is a serious issue and the City is undertaking a parking study to hopefully resolve some of the parking issues that people have raised Downtown. He added that staff is definitely aware as well that this is a PUD and gives a little more flexibility in terms of prescribing the development regulations on the site for this project. He indicated that staff is not comfortable with going beyond the five spaces primarily because the Code as currently written is pretty clear in dictating that changes in use in existing commercial buildings that are older than five years cannot be taken into account. He pointed out that looking at in-lieu parking fees for five spaces is already going quite a bit beyond Code requirements for at least some of those, because there is no explicit regulation in the Code that allows payment of in-lieu fees for on-street or removal of on-street parking spaces. He added that staff can see the argument for asking for in-lieu fees for the on-site parking spaces, but because of the relatively clear direction in the Code related to the change in uses that occurs in these older buildings and the provision of parking for those uses, staff would not be comfortable recommending going forward for in-lieu fees for more than the five spaces. Commissioner O'Connor requested clarification of staffs statement that the current Code requires that the applicants have to pay in-lieu fees for two spaces. Mr. Weinstein replied that is a reasonable interpretation. He reiterated that the Code is a little bit unclear and ambiguous, but staff feels that Section 18.88 of the Municipal Code would lead to that conclusion. Ms. Harryman stated that she comes from a little different perspective than Mr. Weinstein but to the same conclusion of five spaces as being the maximum. She indicated that she does not see the seven spaces; that three spaces are being lost on the street due to the driveways is pretty clear to her, so in-lieu fees for those are fine. She further indicated that two spaces being removed because of the garage being removed is a little less clear to her, and her read of the Section 18.88.080 of the Municipal Code would probably require in-lieu fees on that as well: "No on-site parking facility shall be reduced in capacity or in area without sufficient additional capacity or additional area being provided to comply with the regulations of this chapter." She stated that it is a little easier than thinking off-street, and she sees that as being the two parking spaces in the property as being made up for by in-lieu fees. Commission O'Connor inquired what section of the Municipal Code refers to the other three spaces. Ms. Harryman replied that the other section is Section 18.88.020. She stated that staff came about those two spaces as not being required because they were looking at that language. She continued that the basic thought of this, if it were not in Downtown, is that they are putting in three new homes, and they would have parking in the garage and in the driveway. She added that enlargement of the structure or change of use in the existing structure would also prompt additional parking. She noted, however, that Subsection D of Section 18.88.020 provides that "For property zoned C-C or 0 and located within the Downtown Revitalization District ... the following requirements shall modify the basic requirements of Subsection A of this section: a change of use shall not constitute a `major alteration'or `enlargement'if the age of the building in which the use DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 11/182015 Page 13 of 22