CCMIN052196 - Laserfiche WebLink

occur here. He agreed maximum flexibility should be maintained and options kept open. He did not want to look at design guidelines after the preannexation and development agreements are signed. Ms. Michelotti did not suggest that there be no design guidelines; she felt the environmental work should proceed first. She felt option 3 of the staff report was appropriate. She did not want the City to spend the money to hire someone to do the design guidelines for the whole project. She felt the developer could bring recommended design guidelines for the City to respond to. Mr. Tarvet did not want to postpone the process of getting this moving to the evaluation process and environmental comments. If everyone agrees on Alternative 5, we can accept that for evaluation in the cooperative planning process to move forward. It seems the design guidelines are not going to affect that work. He feels that when you get into the streetscape, neighborhood areas, etc. and design guidelines for each area, we need to discuss those in another session, but that would not adversely affect the other process. Is that tree or false? Mr. Swift felt that was generally true and that is what staff is suggesting. A two step process rather than in parallel, but we could also do that in parallel. Mr. Tarvet felt that there are other things to be talked about in parallel, like development agreements, preannexation agreements, growth management, etc. He has watched this process work and he felt that San Francisco and the consultant can come back with design guidelines that we all agree on. He wants to do all that on parallel processes. It was moved by Mr. Tarver, seconded by Mr. Pico, to accept Alternative 5, start developing the design gulde!Ines, and continue to work with San Francisco on the development agreement, preannexation agreement and growth management issues. Ms. Michelotti asked what he meant by "start the design guidelines process". Mr. Tarvet indicated staff had said it would cost $60,000 for the consultant. Mr. Swift indicated the current motion would direct staff to negotiate a contract to have design guidelines prepared and the contract would come back at the next meeting for Council approval. Ms. Michelotti wanted a separate motion for that because she totally agreed with Alternative 5. Mr. Tarver amended his motion to withdraw the design guidelines portion. Ms. Mohr indicated a few months ago there was a real baffle and she thanked those who got everybody back to the table to develop a plan. She was not here to vote on Mr. Catthorpe 05/21/96 -14-