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