PC 111815 - Laserfiche WebLink

of standard things that typically come up, such as lighting or light spillage and amplified music. Commercial Versus Residential in Relation to the Front House Commissioner Balch stated that he is a mix on this. He noted that the intent of the plaza and how it was sold is very much a public space, but it is not a dedicated public space similar to basically the new Starbuck's space that was done instead of paying the in -lieu fee. He indicated that one option might be to make the residential use a conditional use so it would have to come back instead of being a carte - blanche use. He pointed out that this is a public space, and it would be very awkward if someone went there for dinner one month, and the next month there is someone living in the house. Commissioner Ritter stated that it is proposed as commercial and should be left as how staff recommended it in the staff report. He added that if the economy sinks, the Commission may want to consider supporting them and converting it at that time. Commissioner Balch stated that he supports commercial only. Commissioner O'Connor stated that it would be easier to come back to the Commission if it is a conditional use rather than a PUD modification. Mr. Weinstein stated that there are two ways to do a PUD modification, and one is a lot more time - consuming and onerous than the other: a major PUD modification which goes all the way to the Planning Commission and the City Council; and a minor PUD modification that is processed at the staff level and is subject to appeal to the Planning Commission and City Council. He noted that the circumstances really need to be considered, and if there really was a problem getting a tenant, and staff agrees with the applicant team that it is important to have that space be occupied, staff will be able to work with the applicant at the staff level. Commissioner Ritter agreed. Commissioner Balch stated that it be left as commercial for now without allowing residential, as recommended by staff, and consider a PUD minor modification when the circumstances call for it. Commissioner Nagler stated that he is comfortable with that so long as everyone is clear about what is being said. Commissioner O'Connor commented that it has to be kept in mind that this was a restaurant and bringing a family back in to live in it would require a lot of improvements on the inside, which he is not sure the owners of the building would want to do for a six -month rental. He indicated that he was fine if it can be processed as a PUD minor modification as opposed to a PUD major modification. Commissioner Ritter agreed. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 18, 2015 Page 26 of 34