3A Public Hearing 2012 0521 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 19, 2012 Page 4 of 13 Commissioner Fitzsimons noted that Permitted Uses in the Planned District for this project would require Administrative Review Permits for any use exceeding 10,000 square feet, while transit - oriented uses less than 10,000 square feet may be referred to the Planning Commission. He asked why smaller uses might go to the Planning Commission but not larger ones. Mr. Millenbah said "transit uses" is the operative phrase. It's not known at this time what such uses might be, so it's important for the Community Development Director be able to weigh in and refer such proposals to the Planning Commission as appropriate. Commissioner Fitzsimons asked what "large scale" means in the context of the fast -food establishment listed among "Other Uses ". He also said that it's confusing to see Permitted Uses prohibiting fast food restaurants of less than 2,000 square feet. He doesn't understand why a large one might be okay but not a small one. Mr. Millenbah explained that small -scale fast -food restaurants would be excluded due to the larger size of the retail spaces available in the project. He added that while neither the developer nor the City is looking into a large -scale fast -food operation at this time, the possibility remains open to bring in such an establishment by way of a PD amendment in the future, a process that would involve public input and a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Rennie said he has concerns about the project in the context of the General Plan. He asked the reason for removing the S District overlay, because as he understands the General Plan, the downtown needs density. The TOD Strategy specifically recommends mixed uses, with retail on the ground floor and residential above, he said, adding that the possibility of a residential component someday in the future isn't comforting. He pointed out that the way the proposed project is configured doesn't anticipate adding a residential use. He wanted to know why the City is backing away from mixed -use and density goals and looking at a single -story development. Mr. Millenbah explained that the S designation, implemented as part of the TOD Strategy, calls for a different level of review on each property. The subject property's designation was SP -1, with mixed use retail and residential as Commissioner Fitzsimons suggested. However, Mr. Millenbah pointed out, the City has been unsuccessful in finding any developers interested in such projects in this market. He also said that the proposed Village Marketplace conforms with the General Plan in that residential use would still be allowed. The site plan has approximately 36% lot coverage, leaving a large area available for future re -use. Considering the current outlook for the residential real estate market, though, the City decided to pursue the retail component now, while leaving future residential uses possible. Commissioner Rennie, who said he considers density critical to success downtown, asked where density could come from if the short-term economic stimulus is the reason for backing away from the TOD Strategy's emphasis on density. While he appreciates the value of developing the site as proposed in the short term, he sees no other opportunity for high- density development on a substantial parcel anywhere else downtown. He's reluctant to commit to a project that will affect the shape of downtown San Leandro for 30 years and then to regret a decision that doesn't insist on something closer to the TOD Strategy vision. Mr. Sims agreed that the proposed project isn't specifically consistent with the high- density mixed -use project initially envisioned for this site. However, approximately two dozen other sites in the TOD Strategy area also were identified and remain in the inventory for future development. As for the subject site, he acknowledged that it's a long shot but the site plan has been designed in such a way as to create a reasonable rectangular field that conceivably could accommodate mixed -use high- density development in a strong residential market. He said site attributes probably would dictate a podium -type development, and today's market certainly doesn't support the construction costs involved in such developments. According to Mr. Sims, every indication from the real estate industry, market trends, and rental comparisons up and down the BART