Laserfiche WebLink
of the document and everything has been publicly available since November 2018, short of the <br /> things that had come up in the February Task Force meeting and at City Council direction. <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired about the existing General Plan and amendments made to it and <br /> the process for making changes. He noted that there have been six instances where changes <br /> were made to the General Plan up until 2015 and possibly a few more afterwards. He asked <br /> what the main reason was for these General Plan amendments. <br /> Mr. Beaudin responded that the reasons have varied. For example, the 2015 changes related <br /> to the Housing Element. The Planning Commission will be reviewing a request for a General <br /> Plan Amendment related to Workday, Inc. and an office project in the coming months. The <br /> General Plan is a living document, with robust public, Planning Commission and City Council <br /> review undertaken whenever changes are proposed. <br /> Chair Allen posed a clarifying question regarding corner lots. Her understanding in listening to <br /> the City Council's input on ground floor residential was that it needed to be behind commercial <br /> on the key streets identified in the downtown plan. She asked staff to confirm if the item about <br /> residential visibility on corner lots had been raised because staff had identified it as an <br /> implementation issue, or if the City Council was asking staff to re-look at corner lots because it <br /> has been brought up as a concern. <br /> Mr. Beaudin responded that it became an implementation question for staff in how to evaluate <br /> a project that has residential behind commercial on a corner lot if the goal is to minimize <br /> visibility. There is a practical question about how to minimize visibility of a corner lot from an <br /> adjacent location. The residential is behind from the narrower frontage, but it will be fully <br /> exposed from the side. <br /> Chair Allen referenced live/work and her understanding from a Task Force meeting was that <br /> live/work would not be on the ground floor in commercial areas. In the latest recommendation <br /> she is reading that live/work could be allowed anywhere but on Main Street. Therefore, she <br /> asked whether this shifted because she would think they would want to have live/work be <br /> consistent with whatever the strategy was for ground floor residential. <br /> Mr. Beaudin responded that it depends on the configuration of live/work. By code, it is <br /> considered a residential use and it is habitable space for living, but the configuration will <br /> matter. There could be live/work where there is a commercial use at grade and residential <br /> above or residential behind, depending on where it sits in the district. And, staff does not want <br /> to preclude live/work because it has a commercial component as well but will be looking at it in <br /> the same light as residential use. <br /> Chair Allen inquired about how the Planning Commission should be thinking about input on <br /> parking issues in this process. <br /> Mr. Beaudin suggested continuing to address parking the same way that had been <br /> recommended to the Task Force, which is to rely on the existing Downtown Parking Strategy <br /> and Implementation Plan, which includes prioritized means of addressing both parking supply <br /> and parking management. Specific Plan Chapter 5 is the Mobility and Parking chapter in the <br /> document, and it refers back to the Parking Strategy document and other plans by reference. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br />