Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Swift added that staff would first try to work it out with <br /> the neighbors as far as the location. If Council were to choose to <br /> include a secondary access, the road would become a major part of <br /> the Specific Plan that is already being conducted. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler asked if there was anything specifically in the <br /> conditions about lighting the golf course. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that it was staff's intent that there would <br /> be no lighting on the golf course. If it was not listed in the <br /> operations plan it was staff's intent to do so. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler then asked Mr. Swift to comment regarding the <br /> layout of the golf course and traffic mitigations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that Mr. Tichinin was correct that Council <br />could not approve a project that is not consistent with the General <br />Plan, even with overriding considerations. Staff has found that <br />the project with the recommended conditions is consistent with the <br />General Plan. The project does have some environmental impacts <br />that needed overriding considerations. The EIR did not find <br />traffic to be one of those. Council needed to decide what level of <br />comfort it has with respect to whether or not it thinks the project <br />would make traffic a significant impact. If Council did find that <br />there would potentially be more than 3,000 cars per day, he thought <br />it could still find it consistent with the General Plan. He agreed <br />that Council then would have to make a finding that the ADT would <br />be a potentially significant impact for which it would need to <br />adopt mitigation measures. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that the issue of the layout of the golf <br />course came up as a response to the draft EIR and the relocation of <br />at least two of the holes. The other modifications of the golf <br />course are not directly addressed in the EIR materials but are <br />addressed in the staff reports for both the Planning Commission and <br />Council. The impact of the oak woodland is essentially the same. <br />Less woodland would be removed with golf course Alternative E but <br />the course is longer and would affect the grass land more and <br />affects the overall habitat area a little more than Alternative D. <br />He felt that Council was able to take action this evening with <br />respect to this as an Alternative in that it was considered in <br />conjunction with a response to comments on the EIR. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler referred to the comment that was made regarding <br />monitoring compliance with PUD conditions. He said that it is not <br />normally written into the PUD and that there are separate programs <br />for monitoring. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that CEQA now requires that Council adopt <br />an environmental monitoring program and this Council has done that <br />since the law came into effect. It is normally done as part of the <br />EIR and includes a list of all of the mitigation measures as <br /> <br />9/15/92 32 <br /> <br /> <br />