Laserfiche WebLink
PUD - 9 0 - 1 4 Jo s eoh w Ca i l a2iaa _ Jr . <br />App 1 3 cat 3 oa to r e z one as approximate 1y 1 2_ 5 4 a cr a s i t e f rom R- 1- <br />2 O ~ O O O aad PIID - (P 1 aaaed Ua it Dave 1 opmgat ) - Commer c is 1 D i s tr i ct <br />to PIID ( P 1 aaaed IIa i t Dgve lopmeat ) H igh Deas i ty Re s i d gat i a 1 <br />District ~ aad d eve 1 opmeat p 1aa approva 1 f or 8 8 s iag 1 e- f am i 1y <br />detached ~ 2 4 s ing 1 e- f am i 1y attached towahous e s, and 4 9 s iag 1 e- <br />fami iy a e to rhea • Carr iage•• ua i t s 1o ca t ed a t 3 8 0 1 3 9 6 3 aad 3 9 6 7 <br />Stan 1 gy Bou 1 guard oa property genera 1 1y bounded by the new D e 1 <br />va 1 1 a Parkway ~ s tan 1 ey Bou 1 evard ~ aad the IIa i oa Pa c i f i c Rai 1 road _ <br />Mr _ Swi f t presented the sta £ f report recommending approva 1 0 £ <br />PUD - 9 O - 1 4 subject to the conditions o £ the sta £ £ r sport _ He <br />c a 1 1 ed attention to n ins add it i one 1 conditions that were handed <br />out t on i ght . <br />Chairman Matz ern noted that at the 1 a st C i ty Coun c i 1 meeting when <br />the S tan 1 ey B ou 1 eve rd a 1 i gnment wa s d i s cu s s ed , Mr . S rby made a <br />point that the a 1 i game nt s e ems to £ avor a n ew deve 1 opment i n s t e ad <br />o £ the current property owner s on the other s i d e o £ th e s tr e et _ <br />She a slced £ or c 1 ar i F i c at i on a s to why th e a 1 i gnment i s p 1 a need a s <br />i t i s_ Mr _ Swi f t r e sponded that the key f a cto r i n th e p l a nn ed <br />a 1 i gnment i s the curvatur e o£ the road _ The Engineering s t a f f <br />strong 1y £ e 1 t that i£ the road i s w i dened a l l to the s oath it <br />g ive s a pre £ erred red i iu s or constant curve a s on e c ome s a round <br />the c orn er _ Th e curve that Mr _ = rby i s suggesting i s one that <br />the Eng i Weer i ng sta f f s trong ly d i s f avor _ The a l i gnment that Mr _ <br />S rby desire s wou 1 d pr obab 1y r egu it e that the bridge be w i d en ed on <br />the we s t s ids r ether than equally on the ea s t and west , which <br />wou 1 d i n cur mor e r i ght - o£ -way a cqu i s i t i on cost s F or th e c i ty _ <br />_£ the r o ad i s w i d end h a 1 F t o the north aril h a 1£ t o th e s oath , <br />th i s wou 1 d take a l l th e wa 1 nut tree s e a s t o£ C a 1 i£ o r n i a Ave nu e <br />and beyond , which the Commission a nd D e s i gn Review B o a rd ha s <br />stated they want to s eve _ <br />Further d i s cus s i on ensued r egard ing the a 1 ignment . <br />Commissioner M i the 1 ott i wondered whether w ith the a£ F ordab i e <br />aspect s o£ the project , i£ s cho 0 1 impact P e e s a r e being <br />eliminated. Mr_ Swift Said that the City has no control over <br />school impact fees_ Ha said the City can maKe a recommendan on <br />that those fees be eiimin~t ed, but that is up to the individual <br />agency . C omm i s s i oner M i the 1 ott i a l s o wondered whether th e <br />Housing Con s u 1t a nt w i 1 1 be ab 1 e t o get i n p l a c e the me chap i sm <br />that th e C ity needs t o imp 1 ement a£ f ordab 1 e housing a s p ect s, s uch <br />a s in th e proposed project _ Mr _ Swi f t r ep l i ed th at the Housing <br />Con su 1t ant ha s been h i r ed to work on project s such a s th e one <br />be £ ore the Commission t on i ght and ha s exp ert i s e i n such matters . <br />Commissioner s Hov i ngh and Horan Further d i s cu s s ed w i th Mr _ Swi £t <br />whether the Housing Con su 1 tart i s c ap ab 1 e o f h and 1 i ng the <br />complexity o f l ow a nd moderate income housing . Mr _ Swi ft <br />PLANNSNG COMM= S S= ON MSNUT E 3 NOVEMBER 2 8, 1 9 9 0 PAGE 5 <br />