Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk said he walked the entire property and it is very steep. He understands that grading <br />would be massive. He is concerned about the water problem that was discussed tonight and would not go <br />forward with anything else until mitigation measures are taken. He is concerned about the school issues <br />and as a parent of four school-age children he has dealt with the school problems. He feels the school <br />district is certainly not thinking 8S he is and does not know where they are getting their figures. He said <br />he is very sensitive to this area and is not sure that he can agree with any development on it. (Much <br />applause) <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan said he lives in the area and is also very sensitive to what happens there. He noted <br />that he was campaign chainman for Measure M and that he is very concerned what happens in the City and on <br />the Ridge. He felt that the Draft EIR indicates there would be serious environmental impacts caused by <br />this project. He stated he cannot support this project in any way until further research and investigation <br />of the effects of other projects have been made Bvai lable. He wished to go on record as opposing the <br />project. (Much applause) <br /> <br />Alternate Commissioner Wright said he basically agreed with Commissioner Horan's comments. He felt the EIR <br />tried to address the issues, but feels every answer is a stop gap with no clean cut answers. As he <br />understands it, the pedestrian traffic, school issues, traffic, and other environmental issues have not been <br />adequately addressed. At some time, he might consider one or two houses on the property, but right now he <br />feels the whole issue is premature. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh added that he feels the Lund and other nearby properties also should be looked at in <br />depth in relation to this project. Otherwise, he felt another abomination such as on Foothill Road will <br />occur. <br /> <br />Commissioner Michelotti commented that they must be careful in discussing roadways and traffic not to cut <br />off their options. On this particular project she is not willing to sacrifice getting a roadway on a piece <br />of property that would destroy what is trying to be achieved. Viable alternatives and the big picture must <br />be explored, and people must be willing to give a little. <br /> <br />No further action was taken. <br /> <br />MATTERS INITIATED Fill ClJllnSSIOII'S REVIEW <br /> <br />a. Future Planning Calendar <br /> <br />No action required. <br /> <br />B. Actions of the City Council <br /> <br />No action required. <br /> <br />C. Actions of the Design Review Board <br /> <br />No action required. <br /> <br />COKJIII CATlOIIS <br /> <br />There were none. <br /> <br />REFERRALS <br /> <br />There were none. <br /> <br />MATTERS Fill IDlnSSIOII'S INFIIlMATlOII <br /> <br />1. Mr. Swift commented on advice from the City Attorney regarding any private discussion between the <br />Commissioners and developers. He said the bottom line is they can talk to a developer on a one.on-one basis <br />with the understanding that this information cannot be legally used to influence any application. If a <br />case is discussed, that information should be passed on to the other Commissioners. <br /> <br />2. Chairman Mahern reported that the joint meeting planned between City Council, the Planning CommiSSion, <br />and the Design Review Board has potential dates of February 23, March 2, and March 9. <br /> <br />MI/lUTES PLAIINING ClJlnSSIOll JAMJARr 23, 1991 PAGE 9 <br /> <br />]I <br /> <br />- <br />