Laserfiche WebLink
cannot control RHNA and needs to live with it, but it can control how the cap is <br />managed. That is a trigger that the Commission has a choice to use or not use, <br />and the Commission should manage it, not by counting projects where land is <br />going to be residential and not business when they were approved for business. <br />It should count against cap as the land is not being used anymore and should not <br />go into a pool. <br />With respect to competitiveness, Commissioner Allen stated that she also believes <br />Hacienda should be kept very, very competitive; however, dealing with it with this <br />proposal and as the reason it is being discussed today is the wrong way to keep <br />Hacienda competitive. She indicated that it should be dealt with by revising floor area <br />ratios, and, as has been done in the past to keep Hacienda competitive, doing it above <br />board in a thoughtful way with a message of keeping competitive, rather than like a little <br />bit of a back -door deal by taking property, putting it back into a pool, and not counting it <br />against a cap. She added that she has significant concerns that this is the wrong <br />precedent, and if other residents get wind of this, they are going to start to wonder what <br />is going on and how much the Commission is representing them. <br />Finally, Commissioner Allen stated that if the Commission were to consider approval of <br />this, she would like to propose the following two changes to the wording: (1) specify <br />that this applies only to California Center and not to the other sites; and (2) eliminate the <br />last six words "and BART stations and related facilities." She noted that the BART <br />property was already thought of as being addressed in the seven sites. She added that <br />this is from the old ordinance and was included only because BART had not been built; <br />but now that BART has been built and built out, it should be removed as it is confusing <br />and misleading and no longer applies. <br />Chair Pearce asked Mr. Dolan if it was his perspective that the BART station and <br />related facilities are left-overs and not applicable. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that he thinks Commissioner Allen made a good point. He referred to <br />staff for comments. He noted that Ms. Stern pointed out that BART could be intending <br />to enhance its site with additional amenities, but that it is a minor issue. He indicated <br />that it could be eliminated. <br />With respect to Commissioner Allen's question regarding how the cap came about, <br />Commissioner Olson stated that like Mr. Paxson, he was not at those meetings but that <br />he agreed with Mr. Paxson that had he been at the meeting, he would have said that <br />the cap is a bad idea. He indicated that it is the same political pressure that has been in <br />this town for a long time. He noted that he has been in this City for 25 years, and it has <br />always had to have caps. He further noted that the City had a housing cap for a long <br />time, and everyone knows where that went. He added that it were up to him, he would <br />not have a cap on development in Hacienda; but rather, look at each project and then <br />allow Hacienda to respond to the times and to the competitive pressures that are <br />confronting it. He indicated that he, in fact, has wondered what it would take to get rid <br />of the cap. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 28, 2013 Page 11 of 16 <br />