CCMIN011690 - Laserfiche WebLink

49 recommendations came from the staff or the Planning Commission and should not be taken as an action of the Council. He indicated that he would like to have the opportunity to look at alternatives and ask questions. He expressed concern that compromises mean an obligation to the property owners as well as to the future development of the surrounding community. Deciding the location and size of the road determines not only what will happen to the property but also that certain types of zoning cannot take place east of the City. He emphasized that circulation patterns should be considered to disperse traffic and tie the property into other parts of the community and future developments to the east. He concluded that requests for annexation from several property owners on the south side of Sycamore Road whose properties adjoin the City limits should be seriously considered. Mr. Mercer asked staff if the City considered annexing properties up to Amber Lane. Mr. Swift replied that the boundary was specifically taken to the Committee, and it decided to stay on the north side and not extend to the south side. The owners of the property at the intersection of Amber Lane and Sycamore Road has asked to be included in the Specific Plan, but the Committee said it would not extend the boundary. Mr. Brandes stated that he wanted the people who worked hard on the plan to understand that their recommendations may not stand as submitted. He recommended that the boundaries be changed to include properties on Amber Lane in the Specific Plan, and let Council decide if these properties should or should not be included when it considers the adoption of the Specific Plan. Mr. Tarver expressed some concern about the Committee's decisions being made within specific boundaries. He emphasized that considerations should go beyond the boundaries so the City knows what will happen beyond these boundaries and plan for it. He stated that the Council's options would be limited if it considered only the immediate property because there would be no future direction to look at and that decisions should be made now rather than later. He said that the EIR should also address this matter. Mr. Mercer stated that it was his understanding that Council wanted the study to include only the area north of Sycamore Road, where property owners, including the School District, were applying for annexation. The only additional properties which would be considered south of Sycamore Road were those few up to Amber Lane. Mr. Brandes mentioned that although half of the people south of Sycamore Road now state that they want to maintain the rural atmosphere, twenty years from now the majority of the people there would not feel that way because the development that will take place in the area will affect their lifestyle. It would be easier -15- 1-16-90