05 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT Commissioner Allen stated that as she thinks about vibrancy in the Downtown, she also thinks about two things it needs that work together: (1) The plaza is fabulous in that proposed location, and the City should do whatever it takes to get it. (2) On the other hand, that plaza will generate more than 20 potential car needs. She expressed concern that if the City does more and more of this, as more vibrancy is created, more parking will be needed. She indicated that vibrancy includes both parking and amenities, and parking is an amenity. She further indicated that what she hates to do is give one amenity—the plaza — and take away another amenity —future parking. Commissioner Allen stated that she is struggling with this and causes her to begin to ask the question of where the PDA and Mr. MacDonald are going: Should the City be committed to potentially look at a plaza as a Park and Recreation capital funding? She noted that it is a plaza for leisure and recreation, and in that sense, the City should begin to prioritize a certain amount of money that would potentially be flagged in the Parks and Recreation budget that could help offset this plaza and put it back in that parking in-lieu fee fund. She stated that what the City is essentially doing is weighing that plaza as a mini-park, essentially like what San Francisco is doing with its little "parklets" that it has all over the city now. She indicated that she does not know how they are funded but that she is imagining that it would be from its Park and Recreation funds. She questioned if there is a way for the Commission and the City Council to think about build that park it that way. Mr. Dolan indicated that if the majority of the Planning Commissioners have the same concern, the Commission can certainly pass on that concern as a body. He noted that there are two things that need money, and more money is needed for both than what the City has, so a choice has to be made. He stated that the City has current park projects that it is trying to fund that also affect the vibrancy of the Downtown: Bernal Park is nearby but it is a major community asset; and there is also Lions Wayside Park, which is a real project integral to the Downtown that is going to happen and is in need of funding. He indicated that staff is more comfortable with what it is proposing, but that it would be appropriate for the Commission to pass along that recommendation to the City Council to consider if it so desires. Commissioner Posson noted that with respect to this issue of fees, even if the proposed changes do not require the City to fund the offset of in-lieu fees, nothing precludes the City from putting in additional funding. Mr. Dolan stated that was correct. Commissioner Posson stated that he views this as providing staff and the City Council more latitude in weighing those priorities. He indicated that he does not see this as being conflicting priorities because the City is not saying that it does not want parking and does not want to fund parking, but, rather, it provides greater latitude to where the City can balance those different priorities. Commissioner Ritter stated that, in response to Commissioner Allen's question and as a former Parks and Recreation Commissioner, what the City would like is to have more DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 1/8/2014 Page 7 of 11