PC 04/29/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Craig Champion, SummerHill Homes, 777 California Avenue, Palo Alto, stated that he is the development manager for SummerHill Homes, developer for the Spotorno property. He noted that after working with the City for over 9 months, he feels they have come up with a plan that addresses all issues relating to the Spotorno property; however, the plan has not yet been presented to the community. He stated that he is continuing to work with City staff relating to the bypass road. He pointed out that the NSSP required all property owners to pay their pro-rata shaze of the road and he understood that the developer would pay their proportionate share based on a traffic study. He explained that according to the traffic study and the EIR, their shaze of the traffic was estimated at 40%, yet in the specific plan they aze requested to pay for 100% of the road up to the MDR which is a difference of about $1.SM. He also stated that they have requested permission to shift some of the units allocated for the MDR area to an area close to the entry of the golf course in order to help pay for the road, but that staff will not support the request. In addition, he stated that the General Plan permitted access to 22 units in the flat area from Alisal Road, but the specific plan precludes them from having access to Alisal Street, which increases their costs by an additional $400,000. He stated that they do want to stand in the way of the project, but feel they are being treated unfairly. They suggested and will agree to pro-rata cost sharing that those who benefit from use of the road, shaze in the cost. He also pointed out another issue that they have with the specific plan, in that it allows the City to have construction traffic on Alisal Street, but not the Spotorno developers. They feel that this is also unfair. A brief discussion took place relating to the cost of the bypass road by the Spotorno's and their developer. Mr. Champion pointed out that he is not necessazily suggesting that the formula be changed, but that they be allowed to shift some of the density to other azeas of the project without increasing the total numbers. Mr. Higdon stated that the same logic was used relating to this roadway as in the NSSP in that if the golf course was not being put in, the developer would have to pay for the road anyway. He also stated that since it's a nonrtal-sized road to serve their development, the City Council has already determined under the NSSP that no cost sharing should be involved. The issue in this case is trying to get enough units to pay for the road. A discussion followed between Mr. Champion and Mr. Higdon relating to the road sharing requirements under the NSSP. Mr. Champion stated that the NSSP requires developers to the east of the NSSP area to share in the cost of the roads. Mr. Higdon stated that they are required to share the cost on only those portions of the road that are beyond the limits of the funding NSSP developers. In any event, Mr. Champion feels that there was a change in the formula for the benefit of the City and the golf course and they would like some assistance in offsetting the cost. Mr. Champion stated that since he and the Spotornos do not expect to be able to build the maximum of 75 homes in the MDR area, they have made a request to allow them to shift 5 or 6 of those units to an area where the golf course road and the lower Spotorno property fork. He identified the area on the map. He pointed out that the total number of units in the project would not increase. Bill Howell, 6651 Alisal Street, restated his previous suggestion for moving the pedestrian path to the outside of the Happy Valley loop. He also stated that he recently hiked along the Pleasanton Ridge with a geologist who felt that the Verona Fault had not yet hit the surface. He agreed with what seems to be Planning Commission Page 5 April 29, 1998