Laserfiche WebLink
Item 6d <br />Semi-Annual Review and consideration of Growth Management Rea!locations and <br />Allocations. (SR96:277) <br /> <br /> Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to Table 3 and requested clarification. Council denied an <br />apartment project in Hacienda Business Park and asked if those units were still included in the <br />current allocations along with the custom lots. She believed the Table did not reflect reality, <br />but only what is currently on the books. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said that was true. Currently there are approximately 2,724 units that could <br />be built in some fashion. Of those, not all will be built in the time frame indicated, because <br />many of the custom homes will be built later. In addition, there is an application to change the <br />General Plan for the property that currently has an approved project with 460 units of growth <br />management allocation. There are also many other projects that may be built differently than <br />what is currently approved. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked when growth management would be reviewed again. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said February 1997. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarvet declared the public hearing open. <br /> <br /> Jim McKeehan, Signature Properties, 6612 Owens Drive, appeared to answer questions <br />Council may have. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet asked if the units could be moved from the 1997 allocation. <br /> <br /> Mr. McKeehan indicated the preference was to move them from 1998, but they would <br />be willing to work with Council. Perhaps they could move half the units from 1998 and half <br />the units from 1997. Then in February, they could review the situation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver would prefer that approach. <br /> <br /> Mr. McKeehan agreed. <br /> <br /> Richard Glenn, representing the landowners for the Suncrest Townhomes project, 7026 <br />Koll Center Parkway, Suite 213, referred to his letter stating his belief there is a legal basis for <br />reinstating the growth management allocation based on a growth management agreement <br />allocating 25 units in 1997. The owners are ready to go ahead with the project. Because of an <br />oversight, the vesting tentative map lapsed. The owners ask Council to proceed with the <br />agreement for the same project as approved, minus one unit due to discussions with staff. He <br /> <br /> 09/17/96 <br /> -16- <br /> <br /> <br />