CCMIN012197 - Laserfiche WebLink

pitfalls. She suggested creating separate pathways where possible along the Happy Valley road where pedestrians, bicycles and animals can be separate from traffic. Ms. Michelotti indicated she had attended many of these community meetings and has heard both sides. She has a desire for equity for the owners so that the inner loop is the same as the outer area. She would like to see a specific plan process and through that process, the citizens determine what they want for the area. She respects what happened in the General Plan review process, but felt that all the residents have the right to give input on what happens to their individual properties. She strongly supports the golf course, but is concerned about the financing of the project. She appreciated the 700 signatures on the petition, but wished it had included approval for the City to advance money from the General Fund to make this happen. Her concern from the beginning has been the financing and as we move forward, we are advancing funds at the risk that if the project falls apart, the City has lost those funds. She realizes the funds will be paid if the project goes forward. She has no doubt the people want to play on the course. Council needs to review these questions. As she attended these meetings, there were different people who attended on different nights and she thinks she has heard everyone. She supports a specific plan; however, Council has to set priorities. There is the Vineyard Corridor that also wants a specific plan. Ms. Michelotti indicated there is a financial risk to the City. There have been golf course proposals before, but only the developer was at risk in those instances. It was moved by Ms. Ayala, seconded by Ms. Dennls~ to (1) direct staff to proceed with the planning of the golf course; (2) include enough single-family home sites (now estimated to be 24), but not to exceed 34, on the golf course properties to cover the cost of acquiring and developing the course beyond the revenues anticipated from the proposed bond sale; (3) include the Bypass Road to accommodate future traffic generated by the golf course and by future homes in the nearby area. The Road should be financed by supporting new housing development; (4) study the service implications and mitigation measures relative to developing a single-vehicular-access area; and (5) permit temporary vehicular access to the golf course and to nearby areas from the Happy Valley loop until such time as the Bypass Road can be constructed. Ms. Dennis asked for clarification about the areas for new development that would contribute. Conceivably, if there is a bypass road that goes all the way to Lund Ranch, it could benefit too because of access to the golf course. Mr. Swift said to pay directly for the bypass road, it could be done with development anywhere within the loop; Alternative 3A assumes there would be a levy on the development on the Wentworth properties. Any additional units above the 24 units to be built on the golf course property is the most efficient way to put money toward the bypass road because the additional cost to extend the local street and utilities to those lots would not be too expensive. About 80% or 90% of the value of those new lots could go directly to the bypass road, if it is on the golf course property. There are any number of other parcels that could be added to the mix to pay for a portion of the road if they actually use the road, e.g. the Spotorno property, 20 1/21/97