PC 052516 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O'Connor: The conformity is on office on ground floor only for the two fronting buildings we're talking about? Weinstein: Again, that's staffs interpretation. We felt like that's a reasonable compromise or reasonable interpretation of how the Office district should be implemented on this site. You might have a different opinion, but that's just our suggestion; getting a little more office space on just the ground floor and only the buildings that front the street. We think that will bring this project into conformance with the Office district, but you might have different opinions on that. Commissioner Allen: And when you say office, you're talking office /retail, right? Weinstein: Yes, office space with really good floor plates that can be used as retail in the future. Commissioner Nagler: Without saying yes to this, Office cannot have residential on site, correct? That's the issue? Amos: For the zoning district; strictly for zoning, but the Specific Plan and General Plan could allow it. Commissioner Balch: But that's a Policy 15 question we were talking about earlier right? Weinstein: Policy 15 is the height question. Commissioner O'Connor: So when there's conflict between the General Plan and Specific Plan, the General Plan prevails. So, should they conform to the existing Downtown Specific Plan guidelines? I would be inclined to say yes, it should conform if you can put retail there. Beaudin: Does the interpretation that Adam just gave resonate with you? Or, are you suggesting the entire ground floor of all structures on the property. I just want to make sure.... Commissioner O'Connor: Not all ground floor on the property, no. Where I'm conflicted with this obviously is that there are so many homes down there today that have been there for a long time and I don't see anybody at the prices you can get for a home, I can't see anybody tearing down a home and building something that's going to conform to this Office district. I don't see that happening. I think they are going to stay homes for a very long time which is why I don't have a problem with this thing going either way. I mean, you know, I would probably rather see what was proposed by the applicant. I can get on board with retail on the two in the front but I really think long -term these homes are going to stay homes for a long time. Chair Ritter: Okay, let's just keep going down, so I'll go next. I think the Downtown Specific Plan dated March 5, 2002 is 14 years old and a lot of things change in 14 years, so I'm not opposed to making an adjustment a little bit. My kids have changed a lot in 14 years and I think this town has changed a lot in 14 years. I don't like this permanent "office space for lease" sign. It's not a normal lease sign. It's permanently PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 17 of 28