Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout16) 9C Parking Concession AgreemenCity Council August 7, 2012 Page2 2. As part of the City's two year work plan for 2011-2013, the City Council, Planning Commission, and Public Safety Commission directed staff to look at ways to address the City's current parking issues. 3. In October 2011, the City obtained the services of RBF Consulting to conduct a downtown parking study and strategic plan, and a city-wide traffic calming study and master plan, both of which are currently in progress. 4. On July 12, 2012, a Public Notice was published in the Temple City Tribune that the Planning Commission would conduct a public hearing on July 24, 2012. 5. On July 24, 2012, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the Parking Concession Agreements code amendment and adopt the Negative Declaration. The minutes of this meeting are attached as Attachment "D". 6. On August 14, 2012, RBF Consulting will be presenting their downtown parking study findings and preliminary recommendations at a Special Joint Meeting between the City Council, Planning Commission, and Public Safety Commission. ANALYSIS: With the assistance of the City Attorney, staff researched parking concession agreements and is recommending that a section be added to the City's Municipal Code. The Parking Concession Agreements would allow the City to work with businesses, developers and property owners in addressing the City's parking shortage. At the same time, the Parking Concession Agreements would promote economic development by helping to address high level of vacancies, assist in creating pedestrian oriented developments, promote shared parking, and encourage alternative modes of transportation. 1. Current Parking Conditions In recent years, the City has experienced a shortage of parking in the City's downtown, other commercial areas, and shopping centers. Given the City's current parking codes and requirements, these parking issues created challenges in satisfying all parking needs for store employees and customers. The increased dependence on personal automobiles for getting around, and a shift from retail stores to restaurants and professional offices in the City are among the factors that have contributed to the City's parking challenges related to various supply, demand, parking management, and enforcement issues. City Council August 7, 2012 Page3 Currently, if a new business or developer is unable to comply with the City's off street parking standards, the only option for them is to apply for a Zone Variance or seek another location. Over the past 1 0 years, the City's Planning Commission has considered 17 Zone Variance requests for businesses or developers that were unable to provide required parking, of which 16 were approved, and only one request was denied. If the Planning Commission continues to approve Zone Variances for new businesses or developments with insufficient parking, the parking shortage will remain an issue for commercial properties. The City has experienced an influx of restaurants in the City Center Commercial (CC) District of the City's Downtown Specific Plan area over the past few years, causing parking shortages in some public parking lots. In the CC District, someone wanting to add ground floor area is not required to provide additional on-site parking. Additionally, a new business that intensifies a location or requires more parking on-site (i.e., restaurant or medical office) compared to a general office or retail store are also not required to provide additional parking. Parking shortages and related issues have been a deterrent for national restaurants or retailers to open in Temple City. There are many instances when new tenants wanting to locate in Temple City are not able to meet the City's current parking requirements. Also, many national tenants have certain minimum parking space requirements to take a site into consideration. Staff has met with several businesses and property owners that have experienced difficulties in locating businesses or filling vacancies due to these parking issues. 2. Proposed Parking Solutions The proposed Parking Concession Agreements would facilitate options for meeting these important business attraction goals and the associated parking needs issues through the criteria and negotiated conditions included in the ordinance. The On-site Parking Reduction option of the ordinance addresses the need to accommodate a business on a property that cannot provide the parking spaces required, or in other words, that has an on-site parking shortage. The Development Standards Reduction option of the ordinance addresses the need to provide incentives for additional parking in new development. Please refer to Ordinance 12-959 (Attachment "C") for the specific criteria and process for approval. The Parking Concession Agreements would provide the City with a tool to work with future businesses and developers by allowing shared parking agreements with adjacent or nearby properties with excess parking. It could also be used as a tool to negotiate with a developer to build excess parking, and allowing them in return to build additional floor area, exceed maximum height requirements, etc. City Council August 7, 2012 Page4 The excess parking could facilitate shared parking or lease arrangements with other properties that have parking shortages as well. The mitigation fee allows for the City to negotiate with a new business or developer to assist in the cost of parking related improvements, such as to provide new public parking lots or parking structures, assist in funding a trolley or other transportation improvements and programs. Rather than the City continue to approve Zone Variances or allow more intense uses without alleviating the downtown parking shortage, the Parking Concession Agreements would provide the City with options or resources to address specific parking improvements. It should be noted that the fee that is authorized in lieu of an applicant providing an agreement to utilize excess parking will be negotiated by all parties. This is unlike a situation where an in-lieu fee is imposed as a condition of development, and the only requisite for this fee is that the parties are engaged in the process of contract negotiation. However, we have consulted with the City Attorney's office and the Parking Concession Contract in-lieu fee is well within the authority of the City Council to authorize. CONCLUSION: The proposed Parking Concession Agreements would be beneficial to the City in several ways . They would promote economic development, assist in creating pedestrian oriented developments, promote shared parking, and encourage alternative modes of transportation. Therefore, the City Council is requested to adopt the Negative Declaration and introduce Ordinance No. 12-959 for first reading by title only. FISCAL IMPACT: This item does not have an impact on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012-13 City Budget. ATTACHMENTS: A. PC Staff Report dated July 24, 2012, and attachments thereto B. Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-2355 PC C. Draft Ordinance No. 12-959 D. Draft Planning Commission Minutes dated July 24, 2012 Attachment A Tem_ple ~City MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: Staff Report PLANNING COMMISSION STEVEN M. MASURA DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADAM L. GULICK ASSOCIATE PLANNER DATE: July 24, 2012 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CREATE SECTION 9290.5-PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS. BACKGROUND In recent years, the City has experienced parking related issues in the City's downtown, other commercial areas, and shopping centers. The parking issues and problems experienced create challenges in satisfying all parking needs for employees and customers, given the City's current parking codes and requirements. The increased dependence of personal automobiles for getting around, and a shift from retail stores to restaurants and professional offices in the City are among the factors that have contributed to the City's parking challenges related to various supply, demand, parking management, and enforcement issues. As part of the City's two year work plan, the City Council, Planning Commission and Public Safety Commission have directed staff to look at ways to address the City's current parking issues. In October 2011, the City obtained the services of RBF Consulting to conduct a downtown parking study and strategic plan, and a city-wide traffic calming study and master plan, both of which are currently in progress. Similar parking challenges exist in commercial shopping centers throughout the City. With the assistance of the City Attorney, staff have researched parking concession agreements and are recommending that a section be added to the City's Zoning Code. DISCUSSION There are several reasons the proposed Parking Concession Agreements section would benefit the City. The Parking Concession Agreements would allow the City to work with future businesses and developers in addressing the City's parking shortage. At the same time, the Parking Concession Agreements would promote economic development by helping to address high level of vacancies, assist in creating pedestrian oriented developments, promote shared parking, and encourage alternative modes of transportation. Planning Commission: July 24, 2012 2 Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment The Parking Concession Agreements would provide the City with a tool to work with future businesses and developers by allowing shared parking agreements with adjacent or nearby properties with excess parking. It could also be used as a tool to negotiate with a developer to build excess parking, and allowing them in return to build additional floor area, exceed maximum height requirements, etc. As part of the negotiating, the City may also require future businesses or developers to install bicycle lockers (long term) for employees and bicycle racks (short term) to help reduce the parking demand and to compliment the recently adopted Bicycle Master Plan. For instance, the Gateway development was conditioned to provide multiple bicycle racks (short term) and bicycle lockers (long term) throughout the development to assist in reducing the demand for parking. It should also be noted that the City is proposing to soon begin operating a little-to-no cost trolley throughout the City that would provide an alternative mode of transportation for all residents. The trolley route is planned to have stops within a 1 0 minute walk from all residences. The proposed trolley would provide stops at popular commercial centers throughout the City and multiple stops along Las Tunas Drive. The exact days and hours of operation are yet to be determined but will be evaluated to best fit all needs. The City is currently exploring the different options before finalizing the route and cost of the trolley. The Parking Concession Agreements may also allow the City to require a business or developer to contribute to the operation costs of the trolley. Under the current Zoning Code and in the City's Downtown Specific Plan, if a new development or business is unable to provide the required number of off-street parking spaces, the only option for them is to apply for a Zone Variance. In the City Center Commercial (CC) District of the City's Downtown Specific Plan, a property owner building additional ground floor area or a more intensive use (restaurant or medical office) wants to relocate to the CC District, neither of them are required to provide additional parking or apply for a Zone Variance since there are public parking lots throughout the CC District. Rather than the City continue to approve Zone Variances or allow more intense uses in the CC District without alleviating the downtown parking shortage, the Parking Concession Agreements would for example allow the City to require a business or developer to contribute towards the costs of the proposed trolley or pay a fee that will go towards future developments or shared I public parking. The Parking Concession Agreement process and requirements can be found on the attached draft Resolution. The owner or developer would submit an application to enter into a Parking Concession Agreement with the City, and the proposal would require the review and approval of the Planning Commission and City Council. The Parking Concession Agreement has specific criteria in order for an owner or developer to receive an onsite parking reduction or development standards reduction. In order to receive a parking reduction, the parking shall be reduced no greater than 25%; does not impact traffic circulation, public safety or the environment; the owner or developer shall be required to enter into a shared parking agreement, pay an off street Planning Commission: July 24, 2012 3 Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment parking impact mitigation fee or combination of the above-mentioned; and the owner or developer agrees to incorporate certain transportation improvements, whether onsite or off-site. In order to receive a site development standards reduction, the proposed project shall supply off street parking of at least 1 0% in excess of the project's peak parking requirement; a covenant shall be recorded ensuring that the excess parking is available for public use; the amount and location of surplus off street parking shall provide convenient pedestrian access to other commercial uses; the amount and location of any off street surplus parking shall be consistent with any city-adopted plan; and the site development standards reduction does not create an impact on public safety or the environment. In summary, the proposed Parking Concession Agreements would be beneficial to the City in several ways -promote economic development, assist in creating pedestrian oriented developments, promote shared parking and encourage alternative modes of transportation. With those reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council amend the City's Zoning Code to create a Parking Concession Agreements section. On July 12, 2012, a public hearing notice regarding the consideration of a Code Amendment creating Section 9290.5 -Parking Concession Agreements was published in the Temple City Tribune. If approved, the item will be heard before the City Council at their regular meeting on August 7, 2012. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Draft Resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Negative Declaration and amend the Zoning Code as outlined in the Draft Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Draft Resolution No. 12-2355 PC 2. Draft Negative Declaration 3. Environmental Checklist RESOLUTION NO. 12-2355PC A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEMPLE CITY ZONING CODE CREATING A NEW SECTION RELATING TO PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS. THE RECOMMENDED CODE AMENDMENT WOULD CREATE SECTION 9290.5 IN ARTICLE J OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE. DRAFT The Planning Commission of the City of Temple City does hereby resolve: SECTION 1. Based upon information presented in Staff Reports dated July 24, 2012, and based upon a Public Hearing on July 24, 2012 to consider an amendment to the Zoning Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. Parking supply and demand and vehicle traffic use pattern changes over time in the City have created concerns and challenges to meet the needs of residents, visitors to the city, and employees and customers of businesses within the City. These parking challenges for both public and private parking are determined to be potentially detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the residents and businesses of the City. 2. The City has attempted to improve the parking supply by: acquiring property and developing several public parking lots in the downtown area; has allowed for resident parking by permit on several streets; has allowed loading zones for businesses; and has encouraged modes of travel other than automobile. Despite all these efforts, these parking related supply and demand challenges continue to result in safety and economic issues for residents and businesses and related issues to adequately address new business and development requests. 3. It is necessary for the City to initiate additional programs to encourage new and creative means of addressing the City's parking needs. The Planning Commission finds that it serves a public purpose to create a Parking Concession Agreement to (1) reduce the off street parking requirements for a project in exchange for other improvements or fees that will increase parking opportunities for the benefit of the general public or that will significantly reduce the off street parking demand generated by the project, or (2) provide an excess of off street parking available to the general public in exchange for concessions regarding site design or other requirements imposed under Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code is added to accomplish this purpose. Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 2 of 4 SECTION 2. This project should result in no significant effects upon the environment, a Negative Declaration has been prepared, and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt said Negative Declaration in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines. The initial statement as prepared indicates that there is no potential for adverse impact to the environment as it relates to all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission recommends adding Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 of Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the municipal code and reads as follows: 9290.5: PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS: A. General. Pursuant to authority granted by Section 400 of the Temple City Charter, and the general parking standards and requirements of Article J, Chapter 1, Title 9 notwithstanding, the city may in its sole discretion enter into an agreement with an owner or developer of a facility that would require off street parking ("Parking Concession Agreement"). Through the Parking Concession Agreement the city may grant to the owner or developer of the project, as provided in this section, either (1) a decrease in the off street parking requirements that would otherwise be required for the project under the provisions of Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 ("Off Street Parking Reduction"); or (2) certain concessions related to site design standards or other zoning standards under the provisions of Title 9 that would otherwise be imposed upon the project ("Site Development Standards"). B. Review and Approval. The Community Development Director, or his/her designee, shall develop an application form for a Parking Concession Agreement. The City Council shall determine a permit fee, to be established by Resolution, equal to the reasonable cost of reviewing and considering the application. Any owner or developer of a project seeking a Parking Concession Agreement shall complete and submit an application, together with such other information the Community Development Director may reasonably request. An application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. The recommendation of the Planning Commission shall then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. The City Council may approve, approve with modifications, or reject the proposed Parking Concession Agreement in its sole discretion. Approval of a Parking Concession Agreement shall exempt the project from compliance with those certain standards and requirements of Title 9 of the Municipal Code as are designated in the agreement upon the applicant's compliance with the terms and conditions of such Agreement. Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 3 of 4 C. Onsite Parking Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will reduce the off street parking requirement for a proposed project shall meet the following criteria: 1. The off street parking reduction is not greater than 25%, unless a greater reduction is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance; and 2. The off street parking reduction does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on traffic circulation, public safety or the environment; and 3. The owner/developer has obtained a written agreement appropriate for recordation entitling the proposed project to share off street parking with one or more adjacent or proximately-located sites which provide sufficient excess off street parking to absorb the proposed reduction in off street parking on the applicant's site; or alternatively, the owner/developer will pay an off street parking impact mitigation fee as determined to be warranted by the city under the circumstances; or some combination of the above; and 4. The owner/developer agrees to construct improvements (whether onsite or off-site) that encourage and facilitate alternative modes of transportation and that promote transportation demand management and trip reduction measures including but not limited to provision of bicycle racks and/or lockers, electric vehicle charging stations, bus turnouts, bus shelters and shuttle services from public parking facilities or off site private parking facilities. D. Site Development Standards Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will partially or entirely exempt a proposed project from complying with certain specified site development standards shall meet the following criteria: 1. The proposed project will supply a surplus of off street parking of at least 1 0% in excess of the project's peak parking requirement unless a lower surplus is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance, and 2. A covenant must be recorded against the proposed project site ensuring availability of any surplus off street parking provided through a Parking Concession Agreement for general public use or for dedicated use on a site adjacent or proximate to the proposed project as approved by the city; and 3. The amount and location of any such surplus off street parking provides reasonably convenient pedestrian access from the surplus parking Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 4 of 4 location to other commercial uses in the vicinity; and 4. The amount and location of any off street surplus parking to be provided is consistent with any city-adopted plans concerning the supply of off street parking in the community, if applicable, and 5. The site development standards reduction requested does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on public safety or the environment. E. Building Regulations. Concessions regarding off street parking requirements or site development standards shall not include Building Regulations adopted pursuant to Title 7 of the Temple City Municipal Code or that are otherwise imposed by state or federal law. F. Authority. The City retains exclusive authority to enter into a Parking Concession Agreement. The City may choose to enter or reject a Parking Concession Agreement based on an individualized analysis of the particular off-site parking facility at issue. SECTION 4. The secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution Chairman I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temple City at a regular meeting held on the 24th of July, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioner- Commissioner- Commissioner - Commissioner- Secretary PROJECT TITLE City of Temple City ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Consideration of a Zoning Code Amendment relative to creating a section titled "Parking Concession Agreements". This Hearing will involve the creation of Section 9290.5 to Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the Zoning Code. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Temple City 9701 Las Tunas Drive Temple City, California 91780 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Adam L. Gulick, Associate Planner (626) 285-2171 PROJECT LOCATION Citywide PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS City of Temple City 9701 Las Tunas Drive Temple City, California 91780 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Citywide ZONING Citywide DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary). Consideration of a Zoning Code Text Amendment adding "Parking Concession Agreements" as Section 9290.5 of Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the Zoning Code regarding Off Street Parking Requirements . The proposed new section would encourage shared parking, promote pedestrian oriented developments, promote alternative modes of transportation, seek to fill commercial vacancies and provide flexibility relating to parking standards for new commercial developments. OTHER AGENCIES WHO'S APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (AND PERMITS NEEDED) None Applicable \\ Temple-file.srv\cdd\ WORD\FORM\rtanning \CEQA \Code Amendments\ENV CHKIJST\ENV CKIJST, Parking Concession Agreements 9290.5.doc City of Temple City ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Sign ificant Unless Sign ificant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal : a. Conflict with general plan designation or D D D ~ zoning b. Conflict with applicable environmental D D D ~ plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c . Affect agricultural resources or operations 0 D D (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? d. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement D D D ~ of an established community (including a low income or minority community? 2 . POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal : a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or D 0 D ~ local population projects? b. Induce substantial growth in an area either D 0 0 )iQ directly or indirectly (e .g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure? c. Displace existing housing, especially D 0 D affordable housing? 3. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a. Seismicity: fault rupture? 0 0 0 ,0 b . Seismicity: ground shaking or liquefaction? 0 0 D ,KI c. Seismicity: seiche or tsunami? D D D ~ d . Landslides or mudslides? D D D ~ e . Erosion, changes in topography or unstable 0 0 0 ~ soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? f. Subsidence of the land? 0 D D ~ g. Expansive soils? D D 0 )(l h. Unique geologic or physical features? D D D ~ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potcnttally Potentially Significant Less Than Stgnificant Un less Stgntficant No Impact Mitigated Im pact Impact 4. WATER. Would the proposal result : a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage D D D patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b. Exposure of people or property to water D D 0 Jprl related hazards such as flooding? ~ c. Discharge into surface waters or other D D D alterations of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d. Changes in the amount of surface water in D D D ~ any water body? e. Changes in currents, or the course or D D 0 rzr direction of water movements? f. Changes in the quantity of ground either D D D ~ through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interceptions of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? g . Altered direction or rate of flow of D D 0 ~ groundwater? h. Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 D 0 ~ 1. Storm water system discharges from area D D 0 ~ for materials storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage delivery or loading docks, or other outdoor work area? J. A significantly environmentally harmful D D D increase in the flow rate or volume of storm water runoff? k. A significantly environmentally harmful D D 0 increase in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? 1. Storm water discharges that would 0 D D significantly impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that prov ide water quality benefits (e.g ., riparian corridors, wetlands, etc .)? m. Harm to the biological integrity of drainage D D 0 systems and water bodies? ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potcntiall y Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a. Violate any air quality standard or D D D ~ contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? D D D tp c. Alter air movement, moisture, or D D D ~ temperature, or cause any change in climate? d. Create objectionable odors? D D D 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? 0 D D ~ b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. 0 D D ~ sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? c. Inadequate emergency access or access to D D D Jll nearby uses? d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-D D ~ D site? e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or 0 D D ~ bicyclists? f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting 0 D D }a alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks) ? g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? D D D 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or D D D their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage 0 0 0 ~ trees)? c. Locally designated natural communities D D 0 ~ (e.g. oak forest, costal habitat, etc.) ? d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and 0 D D ~ vernal pool) ? ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Potent1 ally Significant Less Than S1gnificant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? D D D p 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a. Conflict with adopted energy conservational D D D 'r$1) plans? b. Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful D D D ~ and inefficient manner? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of D D D hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b. Possible interference with an emergency D D D response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c. The creation of any health hazard or D D D m potential health hazard? d. Exposure of people to existing sources of D D D ~ potential health hazards? ?& e. Increased fire hazard areas in areas with D D D flammable brush, grass, or trees? 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? D D D ~ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? D D D ~ 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? D D D ~ b. Police protection? D D D ~ c. Schools? D D D g} d. Maintenance ofpublic facilities, including D D D ~ roads? ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e. Other governmental services? 0 D 0 ~ 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities? a. Power or natural gas? D 0 D ~ b. Communications systems? 0 0 0 g) c. Local or regional water treatment or D D D ~ distribution facilities? d. Sewer or septic tanks? D 0 D )0 e. Storm water drainage? D D D ~ f. Solid waste disposal? D D D 0 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? D D D ~ b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? D D D ~ c. Create light or glare? D D 0 ~ 14. CULTURAL RESOUCES. Would the proposal: a. Disturb paleontological resources? D D 0 ~ b. Disturb archaeological resources? D D D gJ c. Affect historical resources? D D D ~ d. Have the potential to cause a physical change 0 D D tlJ which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within D D D the potential impact area? 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or D 0 D ~ regional parks or other recreational facilities? b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? D D 0 'rlJ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Sign1ficant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade D D D the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the rang of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve D D D short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c. Does the project have impacts that are D D D individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). d. Does the project have environmental effects D D D which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Page 1 DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 60. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION : The City has had a shortage of parking in the commercial areas along Las Tunas Drive. Th i s is primarily due to the development pattern of the City's downtown. Most of the properties along Las Tunas Drive are 25 to 50 feet wide and 150 feet deep , and a majority of the properties providing only a few parking spaces, if any. The City provides public parking lots north and south of Las Tunas Drive, spanning from Cloverly Avenue to Kauffman Avenue. The increased reliance of personal automobiles for getting around, and a shift from retail stores to restaurants and professional offices in the City's downtown, has also added to the parking shortage in some areas. In order to accommodate desired businesses in the central part of the City's downtown (Las Tunas Drive between Cloverly Avenue and Kauffman Avenue), the City's Downtown Specific Plan was crafted so that more intensified businesses are not required provide off-site parking spaces . In other districts of the downtown and commercial zones, businesses are required to provide parking on site if they intensify the use, i.e. going from a retaiVoffice to a restaurant/medical office . The only option the City has right now is approving or denying Zone Variances for new businesses or developments not providing enough parking . The proposed Parking Concession Agreements would allow the City to work with future businesses or a developer in addressing the City's parking shortage. At the same time, the Parking Concession Agreements would promote economic development by addressing current vacancies, create pedestrian oriented developments and encourage alternative modes of transportation. It would provide the City as a tool to work with future businesses or developers by allowing shared parking agreements with adjacent property owners, requiring fees to go towards acquiring properties for future public parking, and/or provide more than the required number of parking spaces for something in return such as additional floor area, allow the building to exceed height requirements, etc. The City also recently adopted the City's Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), which will promote people from using their bicycle to get around town rather than use their car. The City has already started to require that new businesses provide bicycle racks as a condition of approval to compliment the BMP. The City could also require long term storage (bicycle lockers) for employees to help reduce the parking demand for a particular business or development. For instance, the Gateway Project is providing multiple bicycle racks (short term) and bicycle lockers (long term) throughout the development. It should also be noted that the City will soon begin operating a little-to-no cost DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Page2 trolley/shuttle throughout the City that would provide an alternative mode of transportation for all residents that want to shop and/or eat in the City. The City is considering the trolley/shuttle to run throughout the City with stops being on more than a 1 0 minute walk. The proposed trolley/shuttle would run every 30-45 minutes Monday through Saturday, however, the City is still weighing the all options before finalizing the frequency and route. RESOLUTION NO. 12-2355PC A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEMPLE CITY ZONING CODE CREATING A NEW SECTION RELATING TO PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS. THE RECOMMENDED CODE AMENDMENT WOULD CREATE SECTION 9290.5 IN ARTICLE J OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE. Attachment B The Planning Commission of the City of Temple City does hereby resolve: SECTION 1. Based upon information presented in Staff Reports dated July 24, 2012, and based upon a Public Hearing on July 24, 2012 to consider an amendment to the Zoning Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. Parking supply and demand and vehicle traffic use pattern changes over time in the City have created concerns and challenges to meet the needs of residents, visitors to the city, and employees and customers of businesses within the City. These parking challenges for both public and private parking are determined to be potentially detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the residents and businesses of the City. 2. The City has attempted to improve the parking supply by: acquiring property and developing several public parking lots in the downtown area; has allowed for resident parking by permit on several streets; has allowed loading zones for businesses; and has encouraged modes of travel other than automobile. Despite all these efforts, these parking related supply and demand challenges continue to result in safety and economic issues for residents and businesses and related issues to adequately address new business and development requests. 3. It is necessary for the City to initiate additional programs to encourage new and creative means of addressing the City's parking needs. The Planning Commission finds that it serves a public purpose to create a Parking Concession Agreement to (1) reduce the off street parking requirements for a project in exchange for other improvements or fees that will increase parking opportunities for the benefit of the general public or that will significantly reduce the off street parking demand generated by the project, or (2) provide an excess of off street parking available to the general public in exchange for concessions regarding site design or other requirements imposed under Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code is added to accomplish this purpose. Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 2 of 4 SECTION 2. This project should result in no significant effects upon the environment, a Negative Declaration has been prepared, and the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt said Negative Declaration in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines. The initial statement as prepared indicates that there is no potential for adverse impact to the environment as it relates to all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission recommends adding Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 of Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the municipal code and reads as follows: 9290.5: PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS: A. General. Pursuant to authority granted by Section 400 of the Temple City Charter, and the general parking standards and requirements of Article J, Chapter 1, Title 9 notwithstanding, the city may in its sole discretion enter into an agreement with an owner or developer· of a facility that would require off street parking ("Parking Concession Agreement"). Through the Parking Concession Agreement the city may grant to the owner or developer of the project, as provided in this section, either (1) a decrease in the off street parking requirements that would otherwise be required for the project under the provisions of Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 ("Off Street Parking Reduction"); or (2) certain concessions related to site design standards or other zoning standards under the provisions of Title 9 that would otherwise be imposed upon the project ("Site Development Standards"). B. Review and Approval. The Community Development Director, or his/her designee, shall develop an application form for a Parking Concession Agreement. The City Council shall determine a permit fee, to be established by Resolution, equal to the reasonable cost of reviewing and considering the application. Any owner or developer of a project seeking a Parking Concession Agreement shall complete and submit an application, together with such other information the Community Development Director may reasonably request. An application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. The recommendation of the Planning Commission shall then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. The City Council may approve, approve with modifications, or reject the proposed Parking Concession Agreement in its sole discretion. Approval of a Parking Concession Agreement shall exempt the project from compliance with those certain standards and requirements of Title 9 of the Municipal Code as are designated in the agreement upon the applicant's compliance with the terms and conditions of such Agreement. Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 3 of 4 C. Onsite Parking Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will reduce the off street parking requirement for a proposed project shall meet the following criteria: 1. The off street parking reduction is not greater than 25%, unless a greater reduction is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance; and 2. The off street parking reduction does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on traffic circulation, public safety or the environment; and 3. The owner/developer has obtained a written agreement appropriate for recordation entitling the proposed project to share off street parking with one or more adjacent or proximately-located sites which provide sufficient excess off street parking to absorb the proposed reduction in off street parking on the applicant's site; or alternatively, the owner/developer will pay an off street parking impact mitigation fee as determined to be warranted by the city under the circumstances; or some combination of the above; and 4. The owner/developer agrees to construct improvements (whether onsite or off-site) that encourage and facilitate alternative modes of transportation and that promote transportation demand management and trip reduction measures including but not limited to provision of bicycle racks and/or lockers, electric vehicle charging stations, bus turnouts, bus shelters and shuttle services from public parking facilities or off site private parking facilities. D. Site Development Standards Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will partially or entirely exempt a proposed project from complying with certain specified site development standards shall meet the following criteria: 1. The proposed project will supply a surplus of off street parking of at least 10% in excess of the project's peak parking requirement unless a lower surplus is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance, and 2. A covenant must be recorded against the proposed project site ensuring availability of any surplus off street parking provided through a Parking Concession Agreement for general public use or for dedicated use on a site adjacent or proximate to the proposed project as approved by the city; and 3. The amount and location of any such surplus off street parking provides reasonably convenient pedestrian access from the surplus parking Resolution No. 12-2355 PC Parking Concession Agreements Code Amendment Page 4 of 4 location to other commercial uses in the vicinity; and 4. The amount and location of any off street surplus parking to be provided is consistent with any city-adopted plans concerning the supply of off street parking in the community, if applicable, and 5. The site development standards reduction requested does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on public safety or the environment. E. Building Regulations. Concessions regarding off street parking requirements or site development standards shall not include Building Regulations adopted pursuant to Title 7 of the Temple City Municipal Code or that are otherwise imposed by state or federal law. F. Authority. The City retains exclusive authority to enter into a Parking Concession Agreement. The City may choose to enter or reject a Parking Concession Agreement based on an individualized analysis of the particular off-site parking facility at issue. SECTION 4. The secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution Chairman I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temple City at a regular meeting held on the 24th of July, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioner-Curran, Leung, O'Leary, Cordes, Horton Commissioner- Commissioner - Commissioner - Secretary o\l~ft ORDINANCE NO. 12-959 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 9290.5 TO ARTICLE J OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS FOR OFF STREET PARKING Attachment C THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council determines and finds as follows: A. Based on testimony received from residents and business owners over the course of several years, and the commission of parking studies, the Council determines there to be a shortage of off street parking within the City sufficient to meeting the reasonable needs of residents, visitors to the City, and employees and customers of businesses within the City. The Council finds the off street parking shortage to be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the residents and business of the City. B. In an attempt to alleviate the off street parking shortage, the City has acquired and developed several public parking lots in the downtown area, has allowed for resident parking by permit on several streets, has allowed loading zones for businesses, and has encouraged modes of travel other than by automobile. Despite these efforts, a shortage of available off street parking remains within the City. C. It is therefore necessary for the City to initiate additional programs to encourage new and creative means of addressing the off street parking shortage. The Council finds that it serves a public purpose to enter into Parking Concession Agreements to either (1) reduce the off street parking requirements for a project in exchange for other improvements or fees that will increase parking opportunities for the benefit of the general public or that will significantly reduce the off street parking demand generated by the project or (2) provide an excess of off street parking available to the general public in exchange for concessions regarding site design or other requirements imposed under Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code is added to accomplish this purpose. SECTION 2. Addition of Section 9290.5 of Title 9 of the Municipal Code. Section 9290.5 is added to Article J of Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the municipal code and reads as follows: 9290.5: PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS: A. General. Pursuant to authority granted by Section 400 of the Temple City Charter, and the other parking standards and requirements of Article J, LA#4825-15·1B-3662 V·i Title 9 notwithstanding, the city may enter into an agreement with an owner or developer of a facility that would require off street parking ("Parking Concession Agreement"). Through the Parking Concession Agreement the city may grant to the owner or developer of the project, as provided in this section, either (1) a decrease in the off street parking requirements that would otherwise be required for the project under the provisions of Article J of Title 9 ("Off Street Parking Reduction"); or (2) certain concessions related to site design standards or other zoning standards under the provisions of Title 9 that would otherwise be imposed upon the project ("Site Development Standards"). B. Review and Aooroval. The Community Development Director, or his/her designee shall develop an application form for a Parking Concession Agreement. The City Council shall determine a permit fee, to be established by Resolution, equal to the reasonable cost of reviewing and considering the application. Any owner or developer of a project seeking a Parking Concession Agreement shall complete and submit an application, together with such other information the Community Development Director may reasonably request. An application shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. The recommendation of the Planning Commission shall then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a public hearing noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. Approval of a Parking Concession Agreement shall exempt the project from compliance with those standards and requirements of Title 9 of the municipal code as are provided for in the agreement conditioned upon compliance with the terms and conditions of such Agreement. C. Onsite Parking Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will reduce the off street parking requirement for a proposed project shall meet the following criteria: L\ #·1825·1548·:1662 v-t (1) The off street parking reduction is not greater than 25%, unless a greater reduction is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance; and (2) The off street parking reduction does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on traffic circulation, public safety or the environment; and (3) The owner/developer has obtained a written agreement appropriate for recordation entitling the proposed project to share off street parking with one or more adjacent or proximately located sites which provide sufficient excess off street parking to absorb the proposed reduction in off street parking on the applicant's site; or alternatively, the owner/developer will pay an off street parking impact mitigation fee as determined to be warranted by the city under the circumstances; or some combination of the above; and (4) The owner/developer agrees to construct improvements (whether on site or off-site) that encourage and facilitate alternative modes of transportation and that promote transportation demand management and trip reduction measures including but not limited to provision of bicycle racks and/or lockers, electric vehicle charging stations, bus turnouts, bus shelters and shuttle services from public parking facilities or off site private parking facilities. D. Site Development Standards Reduction. An owner or developer seeking a Parking Concession Agreement that will partially or entirely exempt a proposed project from complying with certain specified site development standards shall meet the following criteria: (1) The proposed project will supply a surplus of off street parking of at least 1 0% in excess of the project's peak parking requirement unless a lower surplus is determined by the city to be warranted under the circumstance, and (2) A covenant must be recorded against the proposed project site ensuring availability of any surplus off street parking provided through a Parking Concession Agreement for general public use or for dedicated use on a site adjacent or proximate to the proposed project as approved by the city; and (3) The amount and location of any such surplus off street parking provides reasonably convenient pedestrian access from the surplus parking location to other commercial uses in the vicinity; and (5) The amount and location of any off street surplus parking to be provided is consistent with any city-adopted plans concerning the supply of off street parking in the community, if applicable, and (6) The site development standards reduction requested does not create a reasonably foreseeable adverse impact on public safety or the environment. E. Building Regulations. Concessions regarding off street parking requirements or site development standards shall not include Building Regulations adopted pursuant to Title 7 of the Temple City Municipal Code or that are otherwise imposed by state or federal law. F. Authority. The City retains exclusive authority to enter into a Parking Concession Agreement. The City may choose to enter or reject a Parking LA #,1825·1548·3662 V·1 Concession Agreement based on an individualized analysis of the particular off-site parking facility at issue . SECTION 3. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that, should any provision, section, subsection, paragraph , sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance or any part thereof, be rendered or declared invalid or unconstitutional by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, such decision or action shall not affect the validity of the remaining section or portions of the Ordinance or part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have independently adopted the remaining provisions, sections , subsections, paragraphs , sentences, clauses, phrases, or words of this Ordinance irrespective of the fact that any one or more provisions, sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases , or words may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. Publication . The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and to its approval by the Mayor and shall cause the same to be published according to law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this __ day of 2012 . MAYOR ATIEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM : City Clerk City Attorney I...A #4825·15-18-3662 V·l I, Peggy Kuo, City Clerk of the City of Temple City, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No . was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temple City held on the_ day of __ 2012, and was duly passed, approved and adopted by said Council at the regular meeting held on , 2012 by the following vote : AYES: NOES: ABSENT: City Clerk LA #4825-1548-:JG62 v-1 INITIATION: 1. CALL TO ORDER PLANNING COMMISSION TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 24, 2012 Attachment D Chairman Horton called the Planning Commission Regular Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 5938 Kaufmann Avenue, Temple City. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners: Curran, Leung, 0' Leary, Cordes, Horton ABSENT: Commissioners: None ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Director of Community Development Masura, Associate Planner Gulick, and Community Development Secretary Venters 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA 5. CONSENT CALENDAR (Roll Call Vote) Commissioner O'Leary moved to approve the Consent Calendar, seconded by Vice- Chairman Cordes and carried by Roll Call Vote. The Consent Calendar consisted of the following item: A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES JULY 10, 2012 Recommendation: APPROVE AS SUBMITTED AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner-Curran, Leung, O'Leary, Cordes, Horton Commissioner-None Commissioner-None Commissioner-None 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None 7. NEW BUSINESS A. PUBLIC HEARING -REQUEST TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR 5072 SERENO AVENUE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 28,2012. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUE THE ABOVE ITEM TO A DATE CERTAIN. Chairman Horton opened the public hearing. Chairman Horton closed the public hearing. Commissioner O'Leary moved to continue to a date certain Continue Use Permit 11-1801 and Tentative Tract Map 71297, to the Planning Commission meeting of August 28, 2012, seconded by Commissioner Leung and unanimously carried. AYES: Commissioner-Curran, Leung, O'Leary, Cordes, Horton NOES: Commissioner-None ABSENT: Commissioner-None ABSTAIN: Commissioner-None B. PUBLIC HEARING-THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO MODIFY SECTION 9296 RELATING TO REDUCING THE SIZE OF NON- RESIDENTIAL PARKING AND ALLOW COMPACT PARKING; AND MODIFY SECTION 9291 RELATING TO OUTDOOR DINING AREAS. RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4) RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS Director of Community Development Masura provided an introduction to the proposed modification of Section 9296 and Section 9291 of the Temple City Municipal Code. Associate Planner Gulick gave a PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Horton opened the public hearing. Jim Clift, 6012 Encinita Ave., Temple City CA 91780 expressed concern regarding the proposed amendments to the parking design standards. Mark Kokayko temple city resident, felt that the parking amendment should be reconsidered. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 Page 3 Ousama Nimri, Temple City resident asked the Planning Commission several questions regarding the proposed parking amendments. Chairman Horton closed the public hearing. Vice-Chairman Cordes moved to continue the proposed Code Amendment to Section 9296 and Code Amendment to Section 9291 to the Planning Commission meeting of August 28, 2012, seconded by Commissioner Leung and carried by Roll Call Vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner-Curran, Leung, Cordes, Horton Com missioner-O'Leary Com missioner-None Commissioner-None C. PUBLIC HEARING-THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CREATE SECTION 9290.5-PARKING CONCESSION AGREEMENTS. RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4) RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENT Associate Planner Gulick gave a PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Horton opened the public hearing. Ousama Nimri, Temple City resident asked the Planning Commission several questions regarding the proposed Code Amendment. Mary Kokayko expressed concerns regarding the proposed Parking Concession Agreements. Chairman Horton closed the public hearing. Commissioner O'Leary moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the draft Resolution, and to approve the Negative Declaration, seconded by Commissioner Cordes and unanimously carried. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner-Curran, Leung, O'Leary, Cordes, Horton Commissioner-None Commissioner-None Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 Page 4 ABSTAIN: Commissioner-None 8. COMMUNICATIONS-None 9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS -None 10. COMMISSION ITEMS SEPARATE FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORS REGULAR AGENDA A. COMMISSIONER CURRAN-None B. COMMISSIONER LEUNG-None C. COMMISSIONER O'LEARY-None C. VICE-CHAIRMAN CORDES Thanked the public for their participation. E. CHAIRMAN HORTON Echoed the comments by Vice-Chairman Cordes. 11. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission Meeting was adjourned at 9:13p.m. to the Planning Commission Regular Meeting of August 28, 2012 at 7:30p.m. in the Council Chambers at 5938 Kauffman Avenue. Chairman Secretary