PC 082416 - Laserfiche WebLink

near term action item to do the study. Then it goes to Council in that fashion and they can decide if they want to bump something from the work plan at this time or if they want to talk about it in 2017 with the new work plan. Commissioner Balch: If I may say Commissioner Nagler's position differently? The problem is from my view on the in -lieu fees if I may just say is that our boat moves. We can't stop the boat of planning. You know, we don't know what the applications come in at any time in the future, how many in -lieu they may have and so by not necessarily addressing it, in my opinion, we don't get started on trying to eventually mitigate the loss of each and every parking spot in lieu we grant or require. And so, I don't mean disrespect, I know you guys are extremely busy with not only these items but also Johnson Drive. I get it. So yes, I think it needs to be something of a high priority. High, in terms of immediate near, you know, I'm not sufficiently qualified I think to say that, and I don't want to step on the toes, but every day we say you owe two in -lieu, we are digging potentially $10,000 deeper in the hole. Commissioner O'Connor: $30,000. We've been complaining about this number maybe not to you. I and about eight other Planning Commissioners before you that I can remember have been complaining about this in -lieu fee for 8, 9, 10 years and every year we let it go by. How many in -lieu fees have we collected in the last 12 months? I mean, if you start adding it up it's a lot. When development's hot and things are happening, we're losing dollars. So I'm glad you brought that up because I think we should at least ask the Council if there's something that's a little less important that we could bump to make room for this. Commissioner Balch: Or ask them their priority on it. Commissioner Nagler: Yeah, the fact is, again, just on the priorities, it isn't possible to have growth continue downtown, both residential and commercial, and I'm saying the obvious right? It's not possible to have the growth continue, to have economic development efforts of the City be potentially effective without at some point increasing the number of spaces to stock, right? And all of the yeomen's efforts you're putting forward obviously trying to do within the confines of existing pavement of what you can do has limited returns and so we're all saying this because we are convinced we're going to have to build something at some time. And when that time comes, we're also going to want to build a Library and a Civic Center and we're also going to want to build something, right? Another park or something, and so if we're not doing our part to ask developers to contribute literally their fair share in addressing a problem that their economic opportunity is creating, then in a particular way, we aren't helping balance out the choices that need to be made between a library and a parking space, right? Commissioner Brown: So I'm just going to add quickly to everything. I agree with all of the comments made. I think it should include land as well because your point is an economic equation. It's land plus improvements because you're making up the.....it can't just be City land and so I would agree with that. One question I had was, do in -lieu fees go into a separate account as they relate to parking improvements? Beaudin: Yes, they're set aside for these purposes. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 24, 2016 Page 30 of 39