|
Council's job to look at the different elements, to look at the entire city and not just one
<br />neighborhood, felt it was important to balance the different elements that go into the rights of
<br />residents and property owners and this is what they are elected to do. She said the Council
<br />recognizes there is not total agreement, but ultimately, she felt the Council needs to weigh what
<br />is good for the entire community and understand there are things that need to be worked out so
<br />the neighborhood does not suffer unnecessarily.
<br />Councilmember Sullivan said it is important to take a step back, look at the entire project in
<br />context and its background in how it evolved. The Council inherited a General Plan and none of
<br />the current members were on the Council, it drew an urban growth boundary, it included this
<br />property as having up to 98 units, and he probably would not have voted for this if he were on
<br />the Council back then, but this is what they inherited.
<br />It was clear to him in 2004 that 98 units was not acceptable to the Kottinger Ranch
<br />neighborhood, he met with those neighbors back then, talked to them about options, talked
<br />about a referendum, and talked about projects being referendud and returning with other
<br />projects such as the Merritt project. An option is also how long do people want to fight off
<br />projects. Another option is that you get a Council that denies the project, which is possible as
<br />well. Another option is the developer does not want to take its chances with the Council and
<br />puts forth avoter-initiative for a project which may include amenities and enticement for the
<br />broader community which takes it completely out of your hands. An example was brought up
<br />about a ridge top citizen's initiative which is an option, but depending upon how it is crafted and
<br />assuming the election is won, if you take away sufficient rights from a developer, they could sue
<br />the City. So, these were all discussions the City had.
<br />As a long-time slow growth advocate, activist, and neighborhood advocate for 15 years, we
<br />thought there may be a better way to do this, and the idea was to possibly get the neighborhood
<br />and developer together and see if a compromise could be reached while getting something
<br />good for the community while also developing the property. He said there are no backroom
<br />secret deals, it is not a slam dunk project, but a development plan that can be presented to the
<br />City which goes through the normal process. With these goals in mind, the previous Council
<br />approved a Southeast Open Space project, the first of which would determine if it could work
<br />with these two stakeholders and come up with a compromise where the City Manager helped
<br />facilitate that process. Two and one half years after that process came the compromise, the
<br />people who deserve credit are Ben Hadley, John Harvey, Mike Regan, Marty Inderbitzen, Jim
<br />Tong and Tom Pico, Nelson Fialho and Arlene Willits, and he agrees it was a fabulous success,
<br />but only the beginning. That plan went to several commissions for 7 public hearings, throughout
<br />the process, the broader community was heard, and the project improved through these
<br />processes and hearings, and because of this, we have a better project today. In the last two
<br />meetings, solutions to problems have been identified; there is a resolution for the EVA,
<br />additional mitigations have been identified for visual impacts, a new proposal to go further with
<br />this in Court 1. He felt many extra steps were taken to try and get the most impacted
<br />neighborhood empowered and involved instead of excluding them on the back end. The plan
<br />has been reduced in half, there are traffic mitigations, design guidelines to deal with houses in
<br />hills, but felt what is being presented is a true compromise and it meets those goals and opens
<br />the door to do something better in the rest of the southeast hills.
<br />Councilmember Sullivan made a motion to certify the EIR, approve the PUD and development
<br />agreement, or option 2 because he wanted to discuss adding conditions. Mayor Hosterman
<br />seconded the motion. City Attorney Roush suggested the motion be first to address the EIR and
<br />then move to act on the PUD and development agreement, given any modifications.
<br />City Council Minutes 21 October 2, 2007
<br />
|