01 8-27-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

City Manager Fialho said there is the availability of having 1 million square feet of additional entitlements to as high as 2 million, depending upon which scenario is chosen. Councilmember McGovern said in talking with the school district, she questioned whether or not they told the City they did not want all the same units put in the same place. City Manager Fialho said when the three options were presented, the school district provided direction to the City in a joint session that their preference was to have the City Council approve a General Plan that had minimal residential development in the business park. She confirmed that they also had a concern with the number of affordable units because they receive less impact fees for affordable units. Councilmember McGovern said her number one goal is completion of the General Plan, and questioned whether the park area was premature when the City has not even done its east side study yet. City Manager Fialho said the Council is put in the position of prioritizing and providing direction to staff, but there is a request from the property owners and this is the sort of forum in seeking direction. Councilmember McGovern said she has never spoken to the stakeholders, does not know what it is like to live in Hacienda, she does not know what needs they have that are not being met, and she questioned whether focus groups would be held with the homeowner associations. City Manager Fialho said this was staff's concern and this was why they developed the subcommittee process for consideration. Councilmember McGovern expressed the need for playgrounds. Councilmember Sullivan said the 1,271 units was the number staff used strictly to evaluate the environmental impacts in the EIR and it is not a proposal for units; just to quantify the range of impacts that could occur. Mr. Iserson agreed, and said staff started with the housing cap as the limit and came up with different scenarios as to how the remaining units could be divided into the different areas based upon what the developers were requesting, and it was not any proposal on the table at this point. City Manager Fialho said this is important; staff really has not zeroed in on what that number is for the park. The Council had a difficult time zeroing in on what the end result would be, as well as the Planning Commission. Staff put a framework in place in the General Plan that said, we will rely on a specific plan process to define what that ultimately looks like. However, staff's reliance on the specific plan was not necessarily something that staff endorsed. Most often, specific plans are in areas where cities are developing and making something from nothing. Therefore, to some degree, staff relied on the business park for that direction. Alternatively, the same outcome can be achieved through a PUD process without making any judgment call tonight about ultimately what that density may or may not be. Vice Mayor Thorne called fora 5-minute break at 8:30 p.m. James Paxson said questions raised were extremely important, and he said what they want to get at is to how they get the process to answer those questions. He said they have many resources from those who have been involved with the park planning process from the beginning, emphasized that part of why the City has not seen them sooner is that they have followed the General Plan update process very closely and they have tried to listen to discussions as they relate to land use and circulation, and they did analyses to look at the underlying policies in the General Plan. He said those programs are entirely supportive of the types of things they will be showing the Council and Planning Commission and want to bring forward. This is why they do not feel a specific plan is the right or necessary vehicle to be used. Also very different is the scope has changed considerably, particularly with regard to residential plans. CCIPC Joint Workshop Minutes 8 August 27, 2008