Planning Commission Minutes
MINUTES OF THE
January 4, 2011
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of San Ramon was called to order by Chair Sachs at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, January 4, 2011 in the Council Chambers 2222 Camino Ramon, San Ramon.
Present: Comms. Benedetti, Viers, Wallis, Vice Chair Kerger, Chair Sachs
Staff: Phil Wong, Planning Director; Debbie Chamberlain; Division Manager; Lauren Barr, Senior Planner; Shinei Tsukamoto, Associate Planner; Alicia Poon, Deputy City Attorney; Luisa Amerigo, Recording Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS OR WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
5. ADDITIONS AND REVISIONS
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
7. CONTINUED ITEMS AFTER CLOSING OF PUBLIC HEARING -None-
8. CONTINUED ITEMS – OPEN PUBLIC HEARING -None-
9. PUBLIC HEARING – NEW ITEMS – None –
10. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ACTION ITEMS – None-
11.STUDY SESSION/COMMISSIONER LIAISON REPORT AND INTEREST ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS.
11.1 Crow Canyon Specific Plan Parking Standards for Interim Land Use for Existing Developments. Staff Report by: Shinei Tsukamoto, Associate Planner.
Associate Planner Shinei Tsukamoto gave a brief summary that the Crow Canyon Specific Plan is a long-term plan providing direction for future development and a vision for 128-acre project area to be redeveloped to a new pedestrian-oriented mixed-use community. Mr. Tsukamoto added that in the plan area, there are many existing properties that were approved for service commercial uses and required less intensive parking than the uses that are allowed today. If these properties are still thriving and are not ready for redevelopment, they will continue to seek new tenants as vacancies become available. The concern arise when service commercial uses are replaced, especially with allowed land uses that would require more parking than the existing onsite parking can accommodate. Mr. Tsukamoto also added that due to the two standards which exist, staff believes that it would be helpful to reevaluate the current policies and procedures and make any necessary adjustments to prepare interim parking standards for viable existing developments.
Comm. Wallis asked Mr. Tsukamoto what landowners need to get proposed uses approved.
Division Manager, Debbie Chamberlain replied that a parking analysis would have to be conducted. Ms. Chamberlain added that in many cases a mix of uses located in some of the older properties do not have as high of a parking demand as the Zoning Code requires. In many cases the analysis will show that based on the type of uses, place and the operational characteristics of those uses, a surplus of parking spaces are available on site. Ms. Chamberlain added in the past cases we would either do a Use Permit for the reduction or another option is allowing a blanket Use Permit for the property that would detail the type of use that would be allowed on site to ensure adequate parking is provided.
Comm. Benedetti asked if this type of use was done in the past. Ms. Chamberlain replied yes, for medical offices which require a higher parking requirement than office buildings. Ms. Chamberlain stated when new applications that are processed in the Crow Canyon Specific Plan such as the “Budget” property a mixed-use development, we require 1 parking space per 250 sq. ft. In a mixed-use environment, we look for shared parking and on street parking opportunities. In older developments, such as the Racquet Club, for them to remain economically viable and until that parcel is ready to develop, we need to be able to provide them with the means to do that. Ms. Chamberlain added that staff wants to maintain the parking standards from the 1989 Zoning Ordinance for those properties but we need to be careful what uses go in and balance the parking needs to ensure adequate parking for the plan area is amended.
Comm. Wallis stated that Text Amendment would be appropriate in order to be more flexible with the parking reduction standards. Comm. Wallis added that the amended Zoning Ordinance should give the Planning Commission authority to consider an on-site parking reduction of more than 25% while retaining the “25%” in the text as a guide.
Ms. Chamberlain clarified that if the Planning Commission can support more than 25% of on-site parking reduction as an interim solution as long as a parking analysis supports it.
Comm. Benedetti agreed with Comm. Wallis and stated that we need to be flexible and accommodate the property owners.
Shinei clarified that Text Amendment would apply to all of the City and not just for the Crow Canyon Specific Plan Area.
Chair Sachs opened the public hearing.
Jim Gibbon – San Ramon suggested cross easements and added that by allowing more flexibility on the types of uses at different times to balance the parking needs.
Respectively Submitted, Luisa Amerigo