PC 051315 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Otto replied that was a separate issue. He explained that the applicant had to provide parking for the square footage of the new building, minus a credit received for Pastime Pool, and as far as the formula works and the Code with opportunity costs in the formula, that number equaled the amount of the public plaza value. Commissioner Balch commented that instead of dollars, the applicant paid in plaza. Mr. Otto said yes. He explained that the prior project for this new site had two parking spaces for which the applicant got credit and did not have to pay. He noted that those spaces are gone, but the prior project would have gotten credit because there were two spaces there. Commissioner O'Connor stated that he would like to go back to the Commission having some discretion on the amount it would want to give for the prior building, either in utilization, or in time lapsed, or design of the new building. He indicated that he has been on the Commission for nine years, and he keeps hearing when the Commission says it is not making precedent that it refers back to something it did. He stated that he knows the Commission has made problems here with parking because it has not demanded enough parking from a lot of people who develop or add on in the Downtown, and he thinks that practice needs to be stopped or Downtown will never have the parking it needs or the funds to build when the time comes to build either a parking structure, or pave the right -of -way. He added that since the City has already used all the fund money to purchase the property, he does not know how the City would exercise its option to pick up the piece on the right -of -way. He stated that money has to come from somewhere and that the City needs to stop making the same type of decisions where it ends up short on parking fees. He reiterated that he is not saying to go square foot per square foot but to do what is right. He indicated he thinks the parameters are between a minimum of three and a maximum of nine, and that discussion is necessary because the City is just boxing itself in here if it keeps doing this. Commissioner Balch stated that he fully sees Chair Allen's argument that two spots were on site and are no longer there. He indicated that he personally believes the Municipal Code needs to change to account for that because as Commissioner O'Connor commented, the City is boxing itself in because not replacing the parking that was demolished seems awfully short- sighted. He stated that he does not know if he is getting to nine, but he wants to see where it is at five. Commissioner O'Connor stated that he would support the five and agreed that the Code needs to be revisited too in relation to terraces and exempting them. He indicated that it is one thing to have a building that has a three -foot wide area within the sidewalks where one has to kind of step through it to even get to one of the tables, but a 1,800- square -foot plaza is a little different from most of Downtown's outside seating, although some of the restaurants have a lot of outside seating. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2015 Page 18 of 32