CCMIN121610WK - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember McGovern questioned whether the square footage for the mixed use TOD was removed from their already- approved square footage done originally when the footprint of the business park was written up. Mr. Dolan said he thinks the General Plan allows this to be added, but it is reasonable to discuss this if one is replacing the potential for commercial with residential, as it is not a complete additive. One alternative the City should look at is, not necessarily on a square foot by square foot basis, but on a traffic basis. If residential is proposed, it generates a certain amount of traffic. When compared, the net difference might be able to be transferred, but not that the residential would be on top of the total square footage, and he thinks it is appropriate to consider there would be some reduction in development potential. City Manager Fialho said the business park is governed by a development agreement. Each of the sites has a certain capacity that has been designated. If the City ultimately approves a PUD project on one of the sites for residential, you are basically replacing the commercial with residential. From his perspective, it is a trade -off. Notwithstanding Mr. Dolan's comments, the Council and Planning Commission has some flexibility to transfer things around, but from staff's perspective, once a project is approved, you have replaced the opportunity for commercial on that particular site. Councilmember McGovern agreed this is her impression. It was worked out in the beginning of Hacienda Business Park when the infrastructure was built. Traffic impacts actually change over time and she did not think today's traffic might be the traffic in the future. She also stated it is not clear whether guidelines are for the three parcels or whether someone will take those guidelines and interpret them for any kind of rezoning that might be done with a Housing Element. She said the Council has always said the task force was to look at the three parcels and those guidelines were for those parcels. Mr. Fialho confirmed they were just for the three sites, and Councilmember McGovern then confirmed that any rezoning in Hacienda is a building block that could be used or transferred to other sites as the City considers additional development in the park. She questioned why there is a need to reduce Owens Drive down so much. The report speaks of 45,000 to 65,000 square feet of retail and now there is talk about 5,000 square feet on that property, which is drastically different. She also questioned the need for diagonal parking if there is such a small amount of retail and asked that the task force think about this because of the significant reduction. Regarding traffic impacts, circulation has not been resolved and there are large differences in the number of units per acre. Mr. Dolan said a more detailed report will be included with the package for approval in the CEQA considerations. Staff did a preliminary traffic impact analysis and was very conservative in terms of the number assumed. They assumed more units than they get, a large number of retail, and also they did not lease out the office. When they refine it down to more detail, they will obtain a similar conclusion. Councilmember McGovern asked to ensure the traffic impacts are clearly understood and make sense to the community. She said she was having trouble with the flexibility issue from the standpoint that there are so many issues on the table and some guidelines are higher priorities than others. She suggested the task force look at these, as well. School issues are also extremely important, given the number of apartments and families with children. She referred to the bike lane pictures on page 17 which shows a bike lane behind parked cars which is dangerous. Joint Workshop Minutes Page 11 of 13 December 16, 2010