PC 111815 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Allen replied that Commissioner Balch was correct on not being consistent, but this is also a PUD, and a PUD has a different threshold. She indicated that given that the concerns about parking is becoming more prominent, she is trying to protect the parking spots and is looking at what parking the project eats up factually, based on some parameters; and that is how she came up with seven spaces that the project loses. Commissioner Balch asked how many spaces the applicants are allocated as their pro rata share compared with all the other businesses in the area, because if there is parking available on the street, then one or two get to park on the street because they are, in fact, Downtown. Chair Allen noted that the study shows that the parking is almost at capacity. She stated that she was Downtown twice earlier, and the street was filled up; there was only one spot available. She indicated that she wants at least five spaces. Commissioner Balch stated that he agrees that parking is an issue. 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 staff's 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 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 18, 2015 Page 20 of 34