Planning Commission Minutes 2010 06 10

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 10, 2010 Page 6 of 12 Sheets discussed her concern regarding the reduction in parking requirement. She sees no compelling reason to change. Russ discussed the analysis used to determine the parking reduction. He continued by explaining the current parking utilization is 1:662 while the maximum observed parking ratio was 1:532. Russell and Russ discussed the 1:500 parking ratio and the utilization rate resulting from the maximum use of parking. Russell stated the revised ratio would serve as a guide for Planning Commission as the city moves forward with additional downtown development. Sheets asked if there be enough parking when the number of patrons increase. Russ discussed another aspect of the parking ratio regarding the walkability factor and how it contributes to a reduced parking ratio. Russell, Lipton and Loo stated their understanding of the parking reduction to help clarify for Sheets the reduced parking ratio. Members of the Public: Michael Menaker, 1827 W. Chokecherry Dr, discussed the utilization of existing parking spaces and if a space is empty is it costly to the City. He stated an important thing to remember is the City owns the property at 637 Front Street and it has always been the intention to utilize the site for structured parking when the demand is warranted. Staff Summary and Recommendation: No additional comments heard. Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: Sheets stated her concerns with the reduced parking requirement and not fully understanding why there need to be any modifications. Pritchard stated he supports the recommended changes presented by staff. Lipton stated he supports the recommendations. He continued with a brief history of the current parking ratio and as more density is added then the parking demand will change and will also require more efficient parking. Loo stated her support of the code amendments and she understands the concerns expressed by Sheets. Russell stated he is very supportive of the recommended code amendments. He stated the 1:500 is sufficient for now but might change in ten (10) years. He also agrees with staff regarding now is the right time for a Parking Action Plan. Sheets asked Russell if the ratio is reduced, where do you build more parking in ten (10) years. Russell stated the need will be for better managed parking. The code changes will not eliminate excess but it does close the gap between need and supply.