Laserfiche WebLink
138 <br /> <br /> and what it thinks is appropriate to do at that time, based on <br /> housing needs. He felt that giving the minimum, and then allowing <br /> flexibility, was the best alternative. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that one of the remarks that was made had <br /> referred to potential zero lot line units. A zero lot line <br /> proposal would be something that she could support. She felt that <br /> this was the best location to put high density. There was a <br /> residential general plan review committee several years ago that <br /> looked very hard at places in the community to put a minimum of 40 <br /> units to the acre. If ever that's economically viable, this might <br /> be a good location for it. To try to hold to a 15 unit per acre <br /> average makes it difficult to respond to what economic and social <br /> circumstance might be. Our general plan is called general so that <br /> Council does have the ability to evolve with time. It was never <br /> intended to lock future Councils into circumstances that exist <br /> today. The ability to respond to changing times is important. She <br /> supported leaving the project at high density which is eight units <br /> and up and looking at future projects on a case by case basis. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver stated that he agreed with looking at each project <br /> on a case by case basis and doesn't have a problem with leaving it <br /> with the minimum of 8 units. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner shared her concern about keeping this at high <br /> density. A parcel in the Business Park with a BART line and the <br /> easy access to transit offered a unique opportunity. She hesitated <br /> to allow anything even close to a neighborhood type mix in that <br /> area and felt that it needs to stay in the high density range. She <br /> was also in favor of leaving that option open to future Councils. <br /> She felt the City needed this project and was concerned in finding <br /> spots for affordable housing. This seems like an excellent <br /> location. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated that item (b) should be continued to let <br /> City staff sit down and figure out what is the best thing to do <br /> concerning the dedication of park land or the payment of fees. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that this project was not able to provide <br /> for large scale uses like soccer or Little League fields. She <br /> would prefer to address those needs in any discussions. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver commented he was not in favor of the original land <br /> use change to Business Park, but at this point and time, it was <br /> appropriate that the Park becomes a mixed land use. It was also <br /> appropriate that there be affordable housing in that project. It <br /> is in a perfect location and will reduce traffic. He felt that <br /> Robertson's project will be an asset to this community in that it <br /> address the housing balance and it has more open space then most <br /> high density housing of this nature. <br /> <br /> 12/10/91 12 <br /> <br /> <br />