Laserfiche WebLink
<br />dispersed purposes because it is a variation of the consensus. Option Bl or B3 could be good <br />for modeling the extreme option for TOD land use (excluding the units for Valley Trails). <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan indicated Hacienda has been working on its proposal for years and has <br />been told by the Planning Commission and Council to prepare a specific plan. They need an <br />opportunity to present something so Council can make informed decisions. If a model can be <br />done as part of an EIR alternative, he was satisfied. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho said something must be modeled for EIR purposes beyond the preferred land <br />use element. If staff is doing that, it might as well use the extreme case. The planning staff <br />suggested Option Bl as being closer to a TOD plan. He reiterated the preference is Bl and <br />said there should be two alternatives and suggested A3 (with zero for Valley Trails). <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky asked what was the purpose of using Bl, was it just to show impacts? He <br />did not know what could be gained from that. He could never accept Option Bl. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho indicated for environmental impact review analysis, there must be a no project <br />alternative, the 1996 General Plan, the preferred land use plan, and two other options for <br />measuring environmental impacts of things like traffic. In order to measure traffic appropriately, <br />the extreme cases ought to be used, one of which would be TOD and the other a dispersed <br />model. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern felt if extremes are used, there should be a model that shows a reserve <br />of 500 units. <br /> <br />Mayor Hosterman indicated that if the General Plan update is to be completed in a timely <br />manner, staff needs to have something to prepare a model with realistic numbers for Council to <br />use. She was concerned that requiring too many models would delay the process. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson explained that the two alternatives are being selected for EIR study <br />purposes and in those cases the reserve loses some of its importance. If one wants to use <br />worst-case scenarios, it might be best to allocate all of the reserve units into the two alternatives <br />that we know are being used only for an EIR exercise. Certainly the preferred land use <br />alternative will include a reserve. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan reiterated that even with the alternatives for the EIR, that is not the final <br />decision. Council can still move things in and out of reserves or to other locations. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson stated these are just working drafts to keep the process rolling and to <br />prepare the EIR analysis. After all the analysis is done, Council will make its final decisions. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho summarized there is a compromise plan and staff is asking for identification of <br />two additional land use option, one in the dispersed and one in the concentrated residential <br />development tables. He suggested for transit-oriented development that Option Bl is used. For <br />the dispersed model, he suggested A2 or A3 for an exercise for environmental impact purposes. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky clarified that this was for the traffic model and these numbers could be <br />reduced later and placed into a reserve after seeing the impacts. Council is not committed to <br />anything. <br /> <br />Joint Workshop <br />City CounciVPlanning Commission <br /> <br />21 <br /> <br />04/25/06 <br />