CCMIN020805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Sullivan indicated there is a current Genera/Plan update process and part of the discussion is this property and the concerns about what happens with those hills. The city has more challenges now for affordable housing and traffic than were ever imagined before. This application is moving forward at the same time as the General Plan update process. Mr. Sullivan preferred that the application wait until the update is complete and then move forward with the project, Mr. Inderbitzen acknowledged that the City is obligated by law to update the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The world doesn't stop while that update process is going on. This property was annexed and prezoned in 1991 for the current uses. The family waited patiently for the 1996 General Plan update process. In the interim they developed a project approach that would be consistent with the General Plan goals and a win/win for the community. The 1996 General Plan involved much detailed study and public hearings and he felt it was entitled to as much deference and respect, as the updated General Plan will be in the future. He felt it was appropriate to retain the current land use designations on the property through to the updated General Plan. Mr. Sullivan felt 1996 was a long time ago and things have changed. The community is currently in the process of deciding what is of value to it with regard to land use. In the next year or so, those decisions might be different than what was in the previous General Plan. He reiterated his desire that the application be tabled until that time. Mr. Inderbitzen did not believe things were that different. He was part of two General Plan update processes and traffic was an issue than as well as now. He felt they had addressed the issues successfully. Housing was significant as well. He noted he was on the board of directors of the organization that built the first phase of senior housing on Case Avenue. It was understood then what the issues were and they are no different today. Some see them differently because they are new to the community. He believed that knowledge is power and the more information about this property that becomes available through the EIR process, and the more debate that goes on during the General Plan update, the better Council will be able to assess whether it is a project that should go forward, or something like it based on the alternatives, or whether no project should be there. He did not think the application should wait. Mr. Brozosky noted that proceeding with the EIR does not guarantee a project will be approved. The developer is aware that a significant amount of money will be spent and at the end of the General Plan update process, there may be changes that might require a redesign of the project. He asked how many vehicle trips would be generated, how much earth would be moved and how many trees would be affected? Mr. Inderbitzen replied there would be 980 trips per day. There would be 122 trees removed. That includes 77 heritage oaks, which would be replaced at three to one, but the landscape plan would result in over 1,000 being planted. The total number of yards of dirt being moved is approximately 700,000. By comparison, the total number of yards of dirt for the previous proposal for this site was three million yards. Kottinger Ranch moved about three million yards of dirt. He noted the dirt would be relocated on site and no trucks would carry dirt off the site. Joint Workshop City Council and Planning Commission 4 02/08/05