PC 051315 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Allen agreed. Commissioner O'Connor continued that as a commercial property owner, he does not want to have a parking problem; he does not want to have too much because he does not want to waste space on a parking lot. He noted, however, that it is his biggest worry because if he does not have enough parking for people to come in and go to each one of his tenants, one of his tenants will have to downsize the intensity of his use. He further noted that without parking, one does not get any business. Commissioner Balch stated that in the calculation staff did here, it says 4,503 square feet minus 3,666 square feet represents a net of 837 square feet, which is divided by 300 to equal three parking spaces. He commented that it would seem like Chair Allen's point of the two parking spaces being on -site would have been factored into this calculation. Commissioner O'Connor countered that what Chair Allen is saying is that it comes down to three additional parking spaces for the new building, plus the two parking spaces that occupied the lot with the 3,666- square -foot building. Chair Allen added that the second part of her argument is that at the time the permission was originally granted to allow these credits, the assumption and agreement was that those two parking spaces would be maintained, and they have not been maintained and are no longer there, so they have been lost. Mr. Weinstein stated that these are all good points and that the Commission is struggling with the parking issue. He explained that staff's recommendation for this sort of credit fits very closely to what is called for in the Municipal Code, which does not indicate that existing spaces that are being demolished as part of a new project be taken into account; it is simply taking the proposed square footage and then subtracting from that the existing square footage and using that delta to figure out the parking demand for the project. He reiterated that because this is a Design Review application, there is not a lot of discretion to add additional parking. He stated that staff is suggesting to not add additional parking requirements as this goes outside of the bounds of what the Code calls for in this case. He added that this is a special sort of environment in the City, the Downtown that is a relatively small but cherished sliver of our City that is probably a little more walkable and a little more pedestrian- oriented than the rest of the City. Chair Allen inquired if staff is saying that her proposal would be inconsistent with how the City has been applying this and what the Code is. Mr. Weinstein said yes. Using 511 Main Street as an example, he stated that ten parking spaces on that site were demolished, and the applicant was not required to pay or in any way make up for those ten spaces that were removed. Chair Allen noted that that was the plaza. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2015 Page 17 of 32