Planning Commission

standing by so it's 7 pm and I'm going to order this JULY 10th 2024 meeting of the city of davis planning commission. It appears that we have all of our commissions here with the exception of bathroom rentals off the record could reflect that. If I could have a motion to approve the agenda. These are set. Second approval commissioner davis, um, unless there's any would desire the jingle approved and adopted it's now time for number 3 on the aenda for brief announcements and some staff commissioners and council leaders on to do any of our fellow commissioners have thank you, cheryl. I'll just mention really briefly that last night at the city council meeting. We received and accepted the 3 year strategic homelessness had been wrong in the works and I just wanted to draw your attention to that. Um because I think you'll find it interesting and also it makes a really explicit statement about the need for that plan to be in alignment with the work that we're about to undertake on our update to the general plan. So I just want to make sure we're all over that work and there's a 2 member subcommittee made up of mayor chapman and council member partida. We'll be working with staff on taking the next steps ad putting the strategic plan into action. So, thank you. Sap. Do you have any announcements? Yes. Thank you, MR. Chair. Good evening. Uh just a couple of project updates for you and 1 um informational item that we've touched on before. Um, last night at council in addition to what uh council member neville shared the shriners notice of preparation was advanced and so released so to speak so staff is working on getting that posted to clearing house and again the appropriate notices, uh drafted to the paper and out in the mail. So shriners is underway, officially, uh village farms, their eir preparation is proceeding, uh along and accordingly, uh, palamino, uh staff is uh, undertaking a review of the administrative draft eir. So that is also coming along, um still looking at planning commission in NOVEMBER. Hopefully before the holidays. Um, so we're hoping we're staying on schedule with that. Uh prominade uh equally is um having their ear analysis, um happening right now along with quite a bit of collaboration with staff. So we're working through things with them and uh as you MAY have heard or seen north cobalt creek project proposed for the of the wild horse golf course that application was formally withdrawn. With a letter to um council and staff on JULY 5th. So staff is no longer processing that application. Uh, we will be issuing a refund for the fuse deposit pid that we did not use in um, the administration of what we did do which was mainly responding to correspondence. We did not undertake the review of the application at all. Um, and so, um share has asked povide you a copy of that letter and I didn't get a chance to email it to you today. So look forward to it more tomorrow or friday. We'll get a copy of that letter so we'll have that for your file along with some of the other correspondents you all received. And then finally, I wanted t give you a quick update the upcoming use of resolutions when the planning commission takes action final action on items. Um, victor and I are working on putting some finishing touches on a we will get out to you in the next week so you can look it over and get more familiar with the format and just the language contained in those um in advance of the JULY 24th meeting and we are still teaming up chipotle to come forward to for a designer within a conditional use permit with so watch your emails. I'll have a few things coming out to you in the next in the next week and we are looking to have a JULY 24th meeting. Journey or have a chance to rule on whether or not this. Um golf course project was the j measure or not did that happen? Well what the city attorney was loking at iitially before staff undertook any review of the application was the amendability if you will of the conservation easement and after quite a bit of work, she determined that it was prudent for her to stop in with the applicant whether they wanted her to continue, um billing them for her review. Um, and then in the meantime, they held 2 neighborhood meetings as you MAY be aware and hence still with the draw. So n the city attorney did not complete her review. Even of the conservation movement, so that's something that would have to recommence. If and when another application came forward that was proposing. The conservation department. A couple of comments, um in terms of the shriners, uh, nop there was a38 page staff report in last night's city council after about that. I appreciate like to quickly get up to speed about that project and its background. I strongly encourage you to download that report and uh, read it and file it so when the project continues to move forward and drive that background as far as the um north coil creek project. Seen the letter that we'll be getting but the vanguard article if you saw that the other day did mention that the applicant was sort of like going back to the drawing boards and and it appears that they fully intend to amend that project and bring it forward again. Given that that culd happen I would caution all this and that discuss the project or any of the emails you got because we don't want to be doing anything that would make it clear that we're biased and on that project if you went from school with that, um any other oh and let the record reflect that we have all the admission with someone, um public comment. Are there any members of the public that wish to come to the microphone now and speak to anything? That is not on the agenda if you wish to speak to an agenda item, you can speak to it at the time that comes up but if there's anything in general that's not on the you'd like to address. This would be the opportunity to do it and you would have to be so any speaker. Do we have any recorded messages or any recorded? We have no recorded comments. So case we'll to item number 5. Which is going to be a public hearing on the oakshade town center plan development amendment and rezone and just for our audience and any members of the uh audience in particular who represent regency properties just to let you know, our process is for public hearing. Um, iformally open the hearing there's a staff presentation the applicant, uh at that time connected presentation as well. We usually limit those to 10 or 15 minutes. Um, then commissioners, uh, the last staff and the applicant if there were any clarifying questions and what that means is a anything either presentation or the written documents that were unsure about or like further information about that to our opportunity to ask it we didn't take public comment. We closed the public comment if there's anything that comes up during public comment that um, the applicant feels like they want to respond to a clarify. That would be their offer to that. Then we go to our own deliberations as a commission. Um, and then we take action. Which in most cases the recommended action is the recommended step, um staff, um motion so with that, um to have a staff presentation and who will be doing it. Yes, we do. I will be giving this staff presentation. Thank you chair dara denoris principal claimer good evening commissioners. Once again tonight. We are bringing forward for your consideration discussion and recommendation of approval to bring it forward to council a collection of use and size changes that would amend the plan development by which the request is to modify certain allowed uses reclassifying certain conditional uses and to rmove size limits for uses within the neighborhood commercial area of the plan development under section 4 this slide shows you an area of the shopping center. Currently the oakshade town center has 2 former junior anchor spaces that are vacant. These are the large purple spaces on the site plan shown here. The property owner regency centers marketing te center and diligently recruiting new tenants through this effort regency recognized that the leasing efforts were hampered by the size restrictions within the current plan development. Prompted in part by staff's early conversations with regency planning staff with simultaneously considering taking a broader approach to updating similar use and size restrictions in other shopping centers throughout the city. The recommended text changes in the amendment are the combination of the property owners and the of regulatory barriers that reduce the marketability of vacant space and commercial centers. Briefly and if I if I go too fast or nonetheless, I can certainly circle back but um didn't want to overburden everyone. So wanted to share that staff was supportive of the applicant's initial request, um to move most of the conditional uses into the permitted uses category, uh staff does recommend leaving the uses as conditional. Um, those would be daycare centers and the requirement for only 1 gas or service station within uh, the new commercial area. Staff was also supportive of the property owners desire to remove the size limitation and particular for grocery stores staff's further analysis brought us to determining all of the size limits limitations should be removed to allow maximum flexibility in today's retail and commercial market. With an expanded permitted uses and no size requirements. There are fewer restrictions limiting potential tenants. Therefore staff is recommending, uh that the commission take action to recommend approval to the city council, uh, the plan development amendment via the draft ordinance including council making the funding of exemption under squaw for this project. That was pretty short and sweet. So I'm happy to answer any questions that you MAY have. Thank you. Is anybody here from applicant? Um regency shopping centers. Do you have any state? Would you like to make come forth. Uh good evening commissioners, um on behalf of regency centers. We thank you for your time this evening regarding oakshade town center. My name is jennifer hess. I've been with regency for 25 years, uh in various roles, uh currently handling, uh, leasing transactions, uh for 20 shopping centers throughout, northern, california. Uh regency began, uh in the 1960s, uh, we started with the development of a shopping mall in jacksonville, florida, uh today we own an operate over 500 shopping centers throughout the country with uh, 20 offices, uh in major markets, uh, we place those offices, uh in in that are near the shopping centers. We are uh close to uh, living and working and and visiting the shopping centers that um, our product type is primarily grocery anchored shopping centers, uh with restaurants retail services, uh that you find in your local. We purchased oakshade town center in 2011. Uh, it's been a very stable and traditional asset for us, uh in our portfolio. Uh, it's been a really great center, uh to have uh in the portfolio. At this current time, uh, we do find ourselves with some leasing opportunities at the center, uh, office max, uh for 21,000 square feet and the former wright aid for 17,000 square feet regency began marketing efforts. As soon as we learned of their closures, uh, and it's a priority for us to increase the occupancy back to 100% we are seeking approval for this pd amendment in order to assist with leasing this this space. Uh as currently written, um, the pd has caps of 15,000 square feet and as mentioned these spaces are in addition to those cap limitations, uh, we are seeing seeking approval to specifically remove the grocery store food store cap of 40,000 square feet. Uh, this would allow the existing ger uh to expand from 14,000 square feet to 57,000 square feet into that former writing space and add a pharmacy to utilize the existing drive-through. Uh the existing brochure at the center. Their typical size is 55,000 to 60,000 square feet. And our plans for these opportunities do not include changes to the building footprints, uh, additional square footage, uh, no significant common area or elevation changes. Uh, we do have active negotiations and process, uh, that would solve for both of these available spaces and they'd be exciting and beneficial to the community. Uh, we look forward to planning commission's support and I'm happy to any questions about regency the shopping center, uh retail real estate environment. Uh etc. It's time for questions. I will start to my left with commissioner, brinkley. Thank you. Um dara, I wondered if staff had any reason for the the um, provisions uh, yeah in staff's experience daycares have some specific needs and they have some specific. Um peak traffic times state regulations that require a certain amount of outdoor space per student or maximum, um enrollment or capacity for the center. Um, and so when you start converting a commercial center, we are taking away parking which is not as much of a concern anymore, but you're you're potentially taking away parking that other uses MAY still lead even though it's not required to create the outdoor space, um traffic and circulation can be um peak sometimes during the same peak hours for the shopping center. And so, um, those are the 2 main reasons that you would really want to carefully look at a daycare use and an exist retrofitted into an existing commercial center. So we felt like it was really appropriate to keep that um under a conditional use that that you could work with the property owner work with a potential applicant and work through safety of the children those kinds of things. Every everything mentioned, um is standard practice when it comes to the daycare use. Um, it it is a challenging use. Um, we we typically do not have a lot of them in our centers due to those reasons. So it is not uncommon for it to require a specific cvp for that use question, um notification and I was going to be the staff as well as yourself. So it will notified of this meeting and the opportunity to tell us a little bit more about what anything beyond the notification that was sent out that there was a meeting tonight of planning commission or is any of the community notified of what might be happening there and what how and if they were how they might have been engaged. To the legal noticing required for this meeting the city met the legal requirements ad and our standard procedures for doing a mail out and and putting the notice in the data center enterprise. So when you say in the mail out te mail out that goes to to us and all the other people who who might it goes to property owners within 500 feet of the property boundary of the entire shopping center very much. Is the state of strip malls and halls right now? I mean I had a comment here that davis has a higher proportion of commercial vacancies and the average in the region. Do see that? And do you have any? To the table. So coming about that in in the industry. I would be curious about and then I'll go from there. Katie. Would be okay if staff answers that question before we asked our honor guests to ask that question since I told her be here to do that. So if she would like to take a seat for a mment, I'd be happy to answer some questions about the state of leasing. Um, particularly within davis oite was here. Hello again, um, and I mentioned that I was going to doing some research and so I'm back because I did my research, u, what I wanted to share with you is that there are um a series of categories that exist for how we describe retail and um, the general categories that we used and I'm getting into the page our malls power centers neighborhood centers general retail and then miscellaneous other um in davis we have power we have uh, neighborhood centers centers and general retail. So for my discussion about vacancies and all that stuff, I'll just be referring to those 3 types of shopping cnters and I think generally speaking you can kind of understand what those would be. I don't think I need to get into a lot of detail. We are talking about a neighborhood center here for this case. So, um neighborhood centers, um in davis te submarket of davis vacancy rate over the past 12 months has been 8.6% and the pardon me lts of papers and the sacramento region. It has been 7% in nationwide is 5.8% so we are hugging the region and the region is higher than nation and wide when it comes to strip malls the numbers for the next step down which are the centers. Um, they're even higher in davis 17.4% um, and are for these smaller size, um retail centers. That's what strip center is. They're smaller size footprints in the region, um in sacramento region at 7.7% and then nationwide, I think it is 6.1% I'm going to go with my med rate 6.1% so you can see that when it comes to the smaller retail footprints. These are about 10,000 square feet or so less than that. Davis has an astronomically high percentage of vacancies in that type less. So in neighborhood, but is higher than the region and nationwide when it comes to neighborhood centers. So we can point to some very empirical data that suggests that um davis has some work that it needs t do to address our vacancy numbers when it comes to our neighborhood, um centers and to our retail strip centers. Thank you. I don't know if this is the overview. Um you said you're in negotiation maybe could even be safeway expanding or something like that. But are you having difficulty finding? Negotiate with yes when it comes to anchor spaces, um, there are a lot of challenges these days. Um, you know, we are seeing a lot of leasing activity in terms of restaurants. Um fitness uses service uses when it leasing, uh, anchor spaces. There's a very small pool of expanding, uh, qualified stable, uh retailers out there, uh looking to do new locations. Um, so so take that, you know, you have uh looking to do new locations. Um, so so take that, you know, you have a small pool and then add that t uh restrictions or prohibited uses. Uh, and and you've got several hurdles to get um a good deal done, uh that, you know brings in a an occupant a tenant that uh, we think market and fits the shopping center. Um, so it it is challenging. Um, it's a very dynamic industry. It's a it's um everchanging. Uh, we we always um, you know, make comments that know every day is a little bit different and uh, we always have different challenges. Um, so it's it is very dynamic but it is still alive, uh, and and doing well, our challenge. Yes. And live here to a different. This and this is my ignorance because I live in north davis. I don't live there so I don't go there as often I think car charging. Facilities there at this. Yes, there are yes only tesla or for other. Um this time, I believe it is only. Is it in the business plan to be expanding that at all or how? Is that yes, we have a um a sustainability program, uh in a department adding all types of services, uh to the centers. So, um, charging stations even solar uh things we're doing with different, um lighting. Uh, so there's a lot of initiatives to uh, keep improving the senders in those those ways. It's just when scheduled to have those improvements made to um, I do not know if for now. Thank you. So my question, I've got a couple questions but um in regards to removing the limit of full service restaurants, I guess my question is wrapped around, um, generally and I'm not a commercial broker so I could be wrong on this but generally when you have restaurants come in you have some sort of an agreement with them that there's not going to be several of the same size and type and you know, so is this going to conflict with what you have there already for restaurants, maybe that's for the applicant. I see right now our our focus is on these 2 anchor spaces, um, and you know restaurant wise we have a some good restaurants at the center currently. Um, and we do carefully look at merchandising, uh in in many different ways. We we don't want want to have duplicate uses. Uh, we're not going to have 2 sandwich shops. We're not going to have 2 mexican restaurants. Um, and we also don't don't want to uh, we don't want to um, you know, put any anything in place that will hurt the existing tenants. Uh, so we do carefully look at at all of the merchandising. Um, it restaurants. I think what we've put in here is more for future, uh, giving us a little bit more flexibility for future. There's not a lot that we're looking to change with that today. S it doesn't there's a a conflict with some sort of like a non-compete - clause in any of the leases that you have for current restaurants, right? Let me ask staff. Thank you and and staff. Do you hve any thoughts on um again the restaurants and removing the limit of um full service restaurants? It's not something that planning feels like, uh, the city should be regulating. We're trying to take a step back and allow the current market forces. To do what the market forces do um, and we're trying to make it so that those vacancies that are out be filled and we really want to leave it to the property owner and the property management companies to manage their business and manage their portfolios. If I might add as well if that's okay. S in addition to the percentages of provided I also thought I could provide it in the terms of square footages because it's a little easier to kind of wrap your head around if I give it to you in square footage. So um vacancies in neighborhood centers, which we talked about is 8.6% which is higher than the region in the nation. Um, dave was experienced in the last 12 months what they call a negative absorption. Meaning that more space was vacated in the centers than was occupied. That was a native abortion of 80,000 square feet, but we have 80,000 square feet in these neighborhood centers in the city of davis that were vacated in relationship to those that were being able to those that were being being occupied. So we have a a huge amount of supply in our neighborhood centers and um in comparison if you look at the you know, sacramento sacramento had a positive absorption rate meaning that more places this is were being occupied were being vacated of 287000. So region wide, we are experiencing a tremendous amount of supply and we should be looking at opportunities to eliminate any barriers that would prevent us from occupying that space if you just look at the basic numbers. Thank you. Um let me read this so I can kind of gather my thoughts, um staff's analysis application of the city's economic goals staff determined that removal of all used square footage restrictions would provide maximum flexibility for a tenant and um later on it says in the past number of parking spots required for various uses was a pimary factor in consider considering conditional uses. So there was also some conversation about um asset, uh, assembly bill 2097 and I guess 1 of the things that kind of floated through my head I there is a lot of parking there and there was open parking even when were filled with businesses. Um is um there an emphasis in all this to possibly even change the footprint of the buildings itself or um, is that not under consideration? No as the applicant mentioned, they aren't anticipating any footprint changes very minor elevation fit and finish changes. This is really about uses and and occupancy opportunities. Um, I there was an opportunity to expand footprints and reduce parking, uh, that would be potentially a a design review. That would be beyond the scope of staff's administrative approval. I think we would potentially look at elevating that to planning commission to look at um, because we certainly now are in a world where we can reduce parking, but I think we would be working carefully with the property owner, um to make sure that that fit their business model and that works operationally for looking at that and making sure that their mix of tenants does include adequate parking. you. Um, and then I think the last thing um is um, uh, let's see here economic development community development staff are in the pro many stages of preparing an on the bus citywide amendment for certain commercial plan developments. And then I think it said that there would be some exceptions. So it kind of sounded lke it was going to be on the bus like everything and then wow. No, it's not really everything so it's kind okay. Is it is it is it I I didn't know what to call it. So that's why I put omnibus in in quotes because it's it's meant to be we're antic we're looking at it as as an overarching, um amendment, but it MAY not be to every commercial property. It's the incident is not every commercial property. We're focusing on shopping centers. We're focusing on commercial centers that have those attributes and have the opportunities where they have some of this the omnibus was probably not the best choice, but I didn't know how to briefly say all that in the staff report. So we're currently working to identify those centers and identify those properties. And so that work is ongoing. Um, and we're hoping to have probably some more progress in the next few weeks and and katie has a schedule that we are working hard to keep up with so I mean, I think the potential I haven't gone out and nodded at any of the shopping centers neighborhood or otherwise, but the ptential for a change in policy and uses in these centers is the same kind of emphasis that we have for housing in our community if you want to create a more vital community you have to create more opportunities, but you know anyways, you know, you might have some comments katie my only comment is that I did send it in turnout to do an inventory this week. Um ad last week so we are actively working on our shopping center assessment. That's part of the reason why I have some of this data ready for and yes, I think it's not an omnibus, but it is a perhaps a regulatory right sizing when it comes to these shopping centers to specifically address these numbers that I brought before you today and how we think we can sort of realign our spaces to fit better in with the regionals market, right? So we want to make sure that we're not continuing to see sch a broad distinct difference between a re our retail centers and our neighborhood centers. Excuse me, our retail shopping strips in relationship to the region. We want to try to close that gap. So I think that's what we are bringing forward is a comprehensive holistic approach that feel will hopefully move these numbers into a direction that's much more, uh, positive and in line with the region that's thank you. Sure. Show was. Yeah, thanks guys. Um, I totally understand what we have to do here in terms of not that I need you to go totally into history, but there was a reason we made a bunch of these things conditional. I'm just wondering what was the reason do we just like to make people jump through hoops, or was there a reason that we said? Oh no more than 4 restaurants. I mean was we were protecting downtown? What was what was the idea? Why were why did we have all of these restrictions in there in the first place? So it it's an interesting question and and of course some of this history predates most of the current staff. My understanding is that in the early 90s, when a lot of these shopping centers were coming in or the existing shopping centers were being revamped and and new markets new supermarkets were changing changing branding and things like that and we were really looking at these. Um, the idea behind the limits te size limits the numerical limits. Um, apparently had more to do with the concept of a neighborhood convenience and amenity. Um, in keeping with walkability and and bicycle use and things like that it it had more to do with um, smaller localized commercial centers rather than larger more regional type oriented centers. Um, that was 1 keeping with with the land use policies at the time. Um, there MAY have been some thought about protecting downtown at keep in mind. this was 30 years ago. So in terms of updating and and like cuttin loose of like right sizing we're we're trying to bring things into where the current market is. Um, and so not not that we don't want convenience and amenities in the neighborhood centers, but the number is obviously changed and and the types of stores the types of ues a lot of things hve gone to online. We all kind of have all that anecdotal information and we can drill it I if we really wanted her to so that's where we understand it. It came from was partly trying to keep small and and neighborhood oriented possibly trying to protect downtown. We think now that the form-based code which we will be talking about later. Could be considered to protect downtown because while the uses are no longer regulated downtown the massing the size. The location of buildings I and code creates sizes and shapes and placements of buildings that do not lend themselves to grocery stores or other large type retailers. So those types of retailers will have to go to other places. They they won't probably work downtown their business model and their footprint won't work downtown. They won't be consistent with the farm-based code now. Yeah, that that's that's helpful. I just I just know that sort of I can't remember if that quote about not learning from history. So I just wanted to make sure that you know, we weren't I had certain time in the place for what we thought we were doing. It was obviously we thought it was the right thing to do and now it's a different time and place. So I'm good with that. I do look up I don't even have the clever. I have a wacky question for the applicant. So and it's just like sorry, but um, we spend alot of time worrying about housing and I don't know in regency portfolio given that it's such a large company and we're fairly senior and you know, you've seen a lot have there been any movements to like redo commercial residential in your portfolio or mixing them. I know it's 2 piece of a dfferent, you know colors sort of thing, but I if you could just quickly without having to give an exhaustive phd thesis just tell us a little bit about that. We'd be interested. Yeah, um, you know, we have looked at doing mixed use properties. Uh, we do have a couple in the portfolio. Uh, they are very rare for us. Um, we really have stayed true to uh, your neighborhood grocery center. So, you know, a a brochure a drug. Um, you know, a drugstore, u, maybe a couple of other junior anchors and then your restaurants and services. So, um, throughout the history of the company that has really been the core product type and um, it has weathered many storms for us. I will say it's uh, we are very necessity driven. Uh, so at times when you see that large malls, uh, you know can can fluctuate with their vacancy. We have been able to stay uh, very we're seeing the same thing with you know adding doing mixed use and adding housing. Um, it is uh challenging, uh, it can be challenging to to lease that first floor. Um parking can be a challenge, uh, honestly getting the economics of those projects to pencil is also a challenge. Um, but but we do try to evaluate all these different changing types of of commercial and retail real estate, so, have question for you before you sit down and then rest for will be for staff. Um if we're going to take off the sze limitations it would be important for me to kow are there any conditions on the parking out there? Is there any exclusive parking or is it al non-exclusive it is not exclusive parking. Yeah, it is all shared. Um, and you know, uh, essentially it's you know, the the boxes do not change. There's the current uh, square footage. So office max is 21,000 square feet, uh, the that we would like to backfill is 21,000 square feet. Um, so it it doesn't it should not impact prking in any excuse me, but uh parking in any, excuse me, but in negotiating at least you would not negotiate for exclusive parking know. In recent years, you know you you probably you guys see some restaurants who want some some spaces for pickup and and such. Um, so, you know, I don't even think we have any of those now. Um, but as far as an anchor tenant coming in and saying, you know, I I need 10 or 12 exclusive spaces. It's it's not something that we typically do. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to riff on a couple of real questions. Um, I actually been in town long enough to know why they put these size restrictions in I think about 2530 years ago. Uh, raley's wanted to come there was a constituency that thought that that was too big they services and then they put a cap on tis square footage and I can't remember what that number was, but ironically. Ironically as time is developed. Now people do want to have grocery stores with they can also go to the pharmacy and maybe have some uh knickknacks they can buy, you know along with their groceries. So iguess my question to you is this um, based on her comments. It sounds like the standard might be around you were formulating the recommendation to take the cap off completely. Did you give ay consideration to maybe just having a higher limit like say 60,000 so that we don't get for instance amega store. That is 1 of the permitted uses in the neighborhood shopping center. Did look we at that. Um, we really wanted to provide the maximum flexibility. We do want responsive to market changes, but we don't want to have to keep coming back either. Um and given that this is an existing summer not a brand new center. We felt that the configuration of the spaces probably wouldn't lend itself to that large of a retailer like a really like a safeway where to go out. Let's say and I think in talking with regency that that's not the direction that they wanted to go because they were talking about allowing safeway to expand but not for safely to go use all 3 of those tank anchor spaces to create something larger. So um do you feel like we considered that and and just we were really concerned about placing limitations. All right. Well, I'm looking through the lens not only of oak shade but your proposal to do an omnibus ordinance and I don't have issue with taking the cap off at oak shade, but do you want to set the precedent to having no cat across the board? Um every neighborhood center in this town? It's a and we haven't got there yet with the the rest of our look at the rest of the cnters and I think we would be well advised to look at that once we've identified the centers that we want to include in our overarching changes. Okay, I think that's fair enough because I don't think it impacts our approval on this proposal. I guess I have another question it has to do with your red line of the ordinance when we kind of recharacterize what was permitted uses and what required a cnditional use. To have you look at uh a13 and you're saying that a permitted use would be residential for office uses on upper storeys above neighborhood retail or personal services. So I'm hooked. I'm looking at the word residential and upper stories. Uh, I don't think there are any upper stories in the oakshade but for instance, uh, westlake plaza has a for instance, uh, westlake plaza has a whole second floor, which is I believe set up for offices and is vacant is is the concept here that you want to uh have a permitted use to have a mix of residential and neighborhood centers. So that was language that was in this peavey to begin with and so we felt that it was appropriate to leave it. Um, the property owner didn't request to take it out. So that does leave the door open for the potential for some residential in this particular center in this in this pd again. That's something we probably want to look at and when we're looking at the different centers there are some that have a second story or if we want to allow the opportunity for second stories to be built or building to be torn down and rebuilding lke a mixed juice building to be in its place. That's something we'll have to take a look at. I think my thought would be that if you want to introduce residential into a neighborhood shopping center, it should be subject to higher level of scrutiny. I think or prohibited altogether. Uh, we we could debate that point not necessarily relevant at uh, oakshade as it is but uh, I I I do believe that it should residential use on a second story of a rtail center should not be a permitted use. It should have a higher level of scrutiny. Is that fair? And that's up to the commission's pleasure. If that would b something you'd like to entertain? Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions. Um to um this idea of the omnibus, uh pd seems like it's uh, maybe overland there's just and there's going to need to be sites. Think sight specific, uh frameworks, but um, I think the general concept of liberalization o these uh codes is really positive but I will look forward to seeing that I have a question for uh, uh regency, um, the there's a fair amount of on to the east of oak shade. Um, I don't know how how big it is, but I wonder if you've done ay analysis of the neighborhood the changing population change in demographics, and and if that your uh of this space set up. The apartments that yeah. Um, I I'd say in general. We are the demographics of each of our centers. Um, we do market research, uh along with marketing to tenants. Um, so it it does play a role in looking at who the c who the the neighboring customers will be um, and I think that with you know, the what we're proposing here with a a new tenant for office max and as well as expanding safeway, I think those those will meet the needs of um, you know, the demographic so but who are our customers who's going to be, you know coming to the center and and we we sort of we have 2 customers right? We have our tenants that are our customers and then um who are the tenants customers? So we're serving both. I don't have any questions. The commission is not such a wonderful job of asking questions. I don't have anything. I do wnt to extend our appreciation have no question, we're going. Okay, um to follow up on the discussion that was in the the developer who said higher quality content, so did that come to well the objective the intent of our bringing in um more economic development. Sorry commissioner. I didn't quite catch all that. I'm not sure I understand higher quality tenants. And it relates back to a question of being that you might have been willing to like how do we serve the community and ensure that it's there's equitable access and interest in serving all of the community in this state. And you alluded to you look at those demographics. I guess hope that you're serious about that because there things changing specifically in south davis. A lot of um more um affordable homes in that area or certainly apartments. And with nugget on 1 side and safeway on the other and then a further distance to go perhaps if you had to go over to north of 80. I would hope that you keep that broader population in mind, um, which I'm sure I assume you're doing that. To rear it. I'm glad to hear that. That is something that you look at because I think that's important. Um it was that same question have you that I think you might have some question which is have you ever developed? Any develop projects where you did have residential? Said you did right or we have not in this northern california region. So I'm trying to run through our projects in other regions. Um, I would say maybe southern california has been 1 where? We have have started to look at um in in maybe you know. Finished a couple of small projects that have residential above. Uh, it's very rare for us. Um, so not we do not have anything planned, u like that in northern california at this time. I'm going to type action another question, which is in the language you say or housing or business is above and to give you some flexibility and perhaps who knows where this in the future but looking at and is that a high because my standing in is that specific language could limit at some point with people saying so that's all or um, and would you be open to that if that does tat make sense to our staff too? I want to make sure this is a question. I don't have an answer. I I'm just wondering if that makes a difference. Component is not crucial admission. Is uh, you know. It something that was included. Um. But not mission critical today. So if that was something that needed to be revisited or you know reworked uh in the future, so okay, I'm bringing it up because of this. I'm the best concept. And wanting to make sure that we keep track of that and or element because I believe we lost an opportunity based on that specific language. That, uh, we will go to public comment on this agenda item are there any people in the audience which can make a public comment. Seeing none victor. Do we have any recorded comments? We do not have any recorded comments. Okay. So public comment period is closed. So this is our time to start deliberating what we want to do with the recommendations before us so I to my right with commissioner been. Just a general comment. I think this liberalization of these zoning restrictions is really welcome. I like it. I hope that it is meeting the what regency feels are their needs to actually have tenants. I live in south davis. I'm tired of all this empty space. Thank you. I was actually very I read this package because all the goals are laudable. I mean economic dvelopment increasing the tax base and helping out of you know, a reputable and responsible retail center owner, uh to uh, you know to improve their shopping center. So, um, I'm prepared to approve this but when it comes to the time to vote or make the motion, I'm going to propose it under a13 the words residential or they're not appropriate or relevant to this particular project and we can leave the discussion for an honors ordinance for later time. On um, I'm prepared to move forward also, I think it's a good recommendation. And um, I want to put in a shameless plug for trying to get a copy shop in there. It would really be nice. Clear coffee, uh, they are um a sacramento base, uh tenant they have this will be their fifth location. Uh, so we're really excited to have them. Um, they will be in the space, uh across from dosa coyotes and have a great patio and uh great great local couple and we're we're really excited about it. To hear pleased to see this coming forward. I I don't drink coffee. So that's fine. But if you have good hot chocolate if they do I'll be happy there in this winter, but no, I'm quite pleased with this. I'm very happy that for our economic development and tax base. We need both of those going on here. And if this is going to help to make that happen, I'm all for it. Very excited that you brought this project forward. Sorry for maybe tough questions, but I just understand the project better. I also want to say that it was wonderful to see why well, I alluded to when the comments about, you know, economic development etc. I think it was really helpful to get that as a frame as you read it for me as I read into the package. It really provided a shell for me to begin to consider things. So I want to first and foremost. Thank you for what I think is a really great job and um, the applicants are working with our city and um also um echo the the wonderful job and I'll say too that we have an audience here of town planners international town planners. So we have 2, uh, prestigious mandela fellows in the audience from south africa in zambia who are have manners in their home countries and are excited about economic development and zoning and rezoning so it's lovely to highlight how it works here in davis for a visitors. So appreciating teamwork here. Well, comment is I I really approach that our city staff has tken to to removing the barriers from economic development. I think there's too often. Um, and I think it's happening here, especially in the day. It was a lot where we tried to dictate how business operates and yet we don't really have any understanding of how business operates we want to limit what they do, but we don't really understand what they do. Um, so I think this is a good example of government getting out of the way. Um and let the market, you know, determine the best use of mixes going forward. So I I the flexibility that you're you know introducing here. Um, I know if I have any particular. Position or opinion 1 way or another on on leaving number 13 in or out I I do know from extensive discussions I had with 1 of your competitors that being bricks more that um, as I said to me they just flat out don't have any expertise in housing. They operate shot and centers and shot them centers and shop in. When te city said to them, well, we'd really like you to put housing at that shopping center. They spent 2 years trying to find a partner. That had some expertise and putting housing in the shopping center and they came up empty-handed. That was 2 years of delay. When no construction was going on sales tax was being lost and uh, building went up I don't think it is necessarily a good thing for us to be thinking about mandating tat retail a mixed use type of thing. But again, I don't have any particular strong opinion when we're noticing that we leave another 13 minutes around so I guess it's time for somebody to make a motion. Maybe we should just talk. yeah, my proposal was to leave a 13 in but just strike the word residential or because I don't have a problem with. Uh an office use on a second floor of the retail center. You just want to get rid of the word residential residential work. Instance, uh, so how would read I'm I'm still on my phone. It would just read office uses on upper stories etc. Okay. Saying it's just a residential and or office uses. Um to me this was in the plan development. It was in begin with right? So it's just sort of cleaning up just commitment. I I don't know why you want to get rid of it. I really I mean I know it's it's not um, it's not germaine actually, it's particularly when they don't have a second story, but you know, I ithink the whole idea is we call it liberal liberating the liberalizing. I can't remember liberating removing barriers or whatever. Let's remove that. Let's just say guys do it do what you want. Maybe the the world changes and another bit and you want to you to put some office stuff in? Well, my my point was if you're going to in the neighborhood center if it should be a higher level of security. It shouldn't just be automated you want to make I want more examination of that opposition and I'm not going to die in that hill on this project because the the footprints there of the buildings are there and there's really no residential future in that center, but I will definitely be back in having this discussion when we do the omnibus ordinance. So is your thought just that um if residential goes in you should look at it more because people living there and there's all kind of oher concerns which you people living in exactly. Okay, peaceful coexistence parking and GOD. I just was trying to understand. Thanks. Commissioners if if I'm if I need to that point we could suggest moving a13 to b3 so that either residential or office would be conditional uses which then would require these are single-story buildings presumably I some what were to go on a second story that would require design review, which would also require coming back to planning commission. So I think if we had that same thought when I said you mean materials and I would nt be averse to moving a13 to uh to the section with the uh conditional resistance. Katie has a suggestion that she wasn't at the microphone, but let the record reflect the sheets that they are in the mall so that I think that's an elegant solution. The only thing I I would point out is that um, I had a boss for about 13 years who was a world-renowned architect in the world of airports in other civic buildings, and he said lots of times buildings get designed and have a second floor or subsequent floor is them and he said I've never ever seen where that's done because he said essentially he needs to get a vacate the building. Happening. Lot of buildings get concerned with the idea of adding a second floor, but it's just financial physical feasibility is not there. So think uh and what my concern developed from I was thinking of west lake, you know converting empty offices to residential should be super nice. So so I you want me to make the motion if you would please do so. I would move that you file the staff's recommendation specifically that we recommend as the planning commission to the city council to introduce an ordinance of the city council of the city of davis and many various sections of article 40 zoning of the day this venus code to amend regulations regarding the downtown base code with the 1 amendment to move. 4 a13 from a permitted use to the conditional use we have a motion that's been made in a second reign further discussion. Has a regulating hypotheticals that are not involved in this particular case. That we have a housing shortage in crisis if there were somebody else there and there was a second story proposed. I I don't see the harm in leaving it as um commissioner truce recommended with office. Residential on top so I I would just be hesitant to further regulate and require. Developers property owners to go additional permitting processes more difficult to get the sort of mixed use development. We say we desire. I I'll just um add on to that and um say that you know while agency I'm sre is very happy to have the shopping and plans to own it for a long time 1 never knows what tomorrow brings and tomorrow could be a different owner that would like to do housing. So I will echo what commissioner brenly says in fairness, we're not saying it's we need to it's not it needs a little additional review and we need to look for client or something. We'll start the voting to my left commissioner. Excuse me. I think the wrong resolution was sighted. Could we double check that it was I read that reform based code. I think you make me start over. There's like 2 weeks in a row. I blew it, you know. So, okay, so I I would propose this emotion that false staff recommendation that the planning commission recommend to the cty council to introduce an ordinance of the city council of the city of davis and lending section 4 neighborhood commercial area of ordinance and p42 as amended by ordinance 186718291 and 1997 number 595 powell lillard vora and make of determination exemption under squaw with the 1 amendment to move 4813 we're committed use to a condition. The second that 1 yeah, have the correct motion on the floor. Start the voting to my left of commissioner trust. We really appreciate you being here and being willing to answer our numerous detailed questions. We wish to send her much success going forward. And with that the public hearing is closed. So have a question for my colleagues. Um we next have item number 5 b a hearing on some changes. Tying up loose ends with the dwntown davis form based code. We're hoping to get this knocked at all possible, I anticipate I'll entry discussion. Does anyone want to take a biological break before we start that discussion or you just want to keep following ahead. Biological break. Okay. Let's try to keep it to 5 minutes and get back to you to resume the discussion. Thank you. If not, we have uh provided a recommendation for you tonight so that I will um explain at the end. To provide a quick review of the form based code. It's not an exclusionary zoning document. It's a zoning code that regulates the form and massing of a building rather than the use explicitly. Its intended to provide predictable results using an objective design standards and regulate architecture beyond massing and scaling as you will find in section 40.14 0080 as you see on the screen, we have 2, uh examples of building types. Each of these building types are allowed in the neighborhood medium zone on the left. You'll see a more traditional example of a multiplex small building type and on the right is a more traditional example of a multiplex large building type. Just like the rest of the downtown or sorry the davis municipal code, the form-based code serves as the objective rules and regulations that govern development. Additionally like the downtown or sorry davis municipal code the form-based code downtown form-based code is a lving document that reflects the realities of the development and the economic environments and MAY require further refinements and clean up as time goes on. Remember and for those who aren't here. Staff brought a discussion item to the planning commission back in APRIL to seek direction related to a few topics that relate to the vision of the development of the downtown plan. Specifically there are building types that are allowed in certain zones. Sap realized that the detached house building type was not allowed in any of the zones wich rendered its legal non-conforming which went 40.28 of the davis municipal code. On the screen there are 2 provisions in the legal non-conforming, uh section of the code the first 1 says any non-conforming building or structure damaged more than 60% of its then appraised value for tax purposes, exclusive of the foundations at the time of the damage shall not be restored or reconstructed and used as such or used second uh provision of the code allows repairs and maintenance as required to keep the construction in a more sound condition, but it also limits, um the amount of alterations and enlargements that you can make on the non-conforming structure. The code really precludes much development from happening on legal non-conforming structures after some applications, uh have been submitted to proposed changes that conflict with what staff originally, um, intent of the code was we sought further direction from the planning commission and city council back in APRIL. Feedback generally affirms staff's uh interpretation of the code but different in some areas as well. So the city council agreed with the current classification of the detached house building type as legal non-conforming. The um generally wanted reasonable incremental development of legal non-conforming structures. Um, they thought any demolition or major alteration to the legal non-conforming building site must establish a conforming building type, which I can explain later. Um, and they mostly wanted to promote redevelopments and densification rather than incremental development. The planning commission your yourself, um had some a little um, you all generally expressed interest in allowing incremental development. Um, you did not want to penalize small alterations or modifications to legal non-conforming structures. Um, and from what we gathered you didn't really express, um opinions about separating building sites with legal non-conforming structures present. You did however, um give staff some direction to reach out to opticos and also review other jurisdictions codes, and that is um, what staff did um, we reached out to opticos who gave us the suggestion to use, um, the existing legal non-conforming code section, um, 40.28 of the davis municipal code and upon further research staff found that other jurisdictions do have additional requirements in their form-based codes on top of um, if not extending the legal non-conforming section in their uh municipal codes, took the feedback from the city council planning commission and opticos to write the proposed amendments to the code. First to stay consistent with section 40.28 of the davis municipal code. The proposed change will include language that will require new building types. Uh a new building type to be established if a structure is damaged within 60% of the apraised value at the time of the damage. In regards enlargements or alterations the feedback staff heard was that some improvements to a property should be allowed as reasonable. Therefore, uh, we are proposing that a non-conforming structure MAY be increased by a total of no more than 15% of the gross square footage existing at the time of the adoption of the form-based code. The 15% number um is not arbitrary. It is actually found 403.02 0.5 of the davis municipal code. Um, it's under the applicability standards. Um, the proposed language, uh will only allow the additions to illegal non-conforming structure if it results in greater conformance with the code, for example, if if a structure, um includes a more conforming frontage type or building type or front yard setback. Finally the demolition ordinance in the code and 5% of the perimeter of the building must establish a new building type the permission of the and applicant property owner. Um, there's 1 project that staff has reviewed that would significantly be limited by the proposed changes. Um, it is located at 523 g street, which is settled in a neighborhood medium zone. On the property there is an existing detached house building type. Um, though it's used for commercial purposes, which is an allowed use. The building type is not allowed in the neighborhood medium. Zone is therefore it's legal non-conforming. The applicant has proposed to build a 3-story 5 unit multiplex small building type in the rear yard. Uh, building sites are allowed in the code under section. 40.14 00705 b. But this proposal does not meet the building site requirement for a 00705. But this proposal does not meet the building site requirement for a multiplex small building in a neighborhood that needs so um, if you're following me if you all MAY um, cange recommend to decrease the minimum building site, um for a multiplex small in the neighborhood medium zone if you so desire proposed changes that we are bringing forward also further further limit the project by precluding multiple building sites to be established when a legal non-conforming structure is existing on the on the on a partial. Brings us to another um proposed change so because the form based code was unclear about densification with legal non-conforming structures, uh that exists on the property. It was planning commission and city council to interpret the language. Amendments uh reflects the feedback and adds the phrase to the code that limits a building site from being established if there is an existing legal non-conforming structure on the wall. So to the existing code in black the added language is unless an existing lot contains a non-conforming building as listed in section 40.28 of the davis municipal code. 1 building type is allowed on the parcel. There are some benefits to the proposed amendments. Um as I'm sure we're aware that reflect the intention of the form based code. However, there are some potential risks that we wanted to shed light on tonight. The the potential risks include the lack or the lack of development or redevelopment entirely as property owners not fully educated on the parameters of the legal non-conforming structures MAY stay away from the issue entirely. As mentioned section 40.28 allows the maintenance of legal on conforming structures, but some people MAY b turned away from them. Now. They're all together due to its uh, secondly an if an unfortunate event occurs um that have that damages or the stories of property a property owner MAY not be able to rebuild the structure, um in a in a conforming matter that is um bringing a structure into compliance, maybe a significant unattainable expense for some property owners. Finally staff has been made aware of potential issues. Someone might experience while obtaining or refinancing a government-issued or sponsored loan on the structure of a legal gun conforming property those loans include an fha loan va loans or there might be underwriting of certain loans, um that are issued by um, freddy met and or fannie mae and