01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Emilie Cruzan, addressed the City Council, said she was shocked to learn that the Planning Commission granted permission for the developer to remove all heritage trees from the site in exchange for only $49,000. She said these trees are a priceless part of the City's skyline and watershed, provide habitat for several species, and filter the particulate matter produced by trains and ever increasing traffic. She was also disappointed to learn that 1) the homes would be only 8 -10 feet from the rear fence line, 2) the project is not subject to affordability requirements, 3) there would be only 5 guest parking spaces, 4) there is no play area within the development, and 5) that there appears to be no time constraints on construction. She also hoped that neighborhood petitions, like the one signed relative to this project, would be given greater consideration in future workshops and hearings. Darell Walterson, addressed the City Council, stated that he owns the property with the garage mounted solar panels described by staff. He assured the Council the footprint of the structure has not changed since he purchased the property in 1983, though the siding and roof has been replaced. He stated concern with the impacts associated with the proximity of the new homes and said he has contracted Solar City to prepare an independent analysis. Harish Shetty, addressed the City Council, said his primary concern relates to parking. Kathleen O'Leary, addressed the City Council, said her property abuts the railroad line from the east. She said the proposed rezoning is infeasible in this particular area for reasons associated with parking and traffic. She voiced surprise that the City would condone the removal of 18 trees, which directly contribute to her quality of life. James Ellison, addressed the City Council, acknowledged the concerns raised but said the project provides a desperately needed boost to and jobs in the local construction industry, which has been ravaged by the recession. He said the project is consistent with existing development up and down the Stanley Boulevard corridor. He said his own company, if awarded a contract associated with the project, would be able to keep a number of employees working. The project would pump money into the downtown merchants and City coffers, and there is something seriously wrong with a society that places more importance on trees than on people. Mike Donahue, addressed the City Council, expressed concern with the precedent set by upzoning this parcel. He said the mobile home park directly across the street is in the process of closing down and his fear is that this is an incremental step in making Stanley Boulevard into apartment row. Jennifer Pearce, Planning Commission, addressed the City Council, clarified her vote on the matter. She said her concern is with the cumulative effects of this development, rather than the particular application. She said she fully supports the property owner's right to develop the property but not a project that demolishes a 102 - year -old structurally sound house, razes nearly every tree on the site, and barely avoids triggering the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. She proposed that the density be raised with an attached townhome type development, keeping the existing home and a greater portion of the existing trees, or that the density be significantly reduced. She requested the application be brought back to the Planning Commission for further discussion. She also said this application clearly speaks to the need for some sort of historic home guidelines. Mr. DiDonato, applicant, reiterated that the basis of the application was driven by the City's General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. He said he is a bit at odds with the issues being City Council Minutes Page 12 of 16 December 7, 2010