Laserfiche WebLink
9.B. - Page 19 <br /> Staff recommends the following process be adopted: <br /> • Staff and the City's environmental consultant would conduct an environmental <br /> review to determine the appropriate "exchange rate" between the various <br /> development allocations. This exchange rate would be calculated so that no <br /> greater impact than what was identified in the EIR take place. Particular attention <br /> must be paid to the transportation section and traffic conditions identified in the <br /> EIR. A full analysis would be completed to examine all potential environmental <br /> impacts. <br /> • Once the environmental review is complete, staff would bring forward an <br /> amendment to the Maximum Allowable Development text that would allow <br /> flexibility between development categories. The associated General Plan text <br /> change would also be considered at the same time. It is expected that staff will <br /> recommend that some limitation be placed on adjustments, so that one category <br /> of development wouldn't completely exhaust another category's allocation. <br /> Furthermore, staff would further recommend that a portion of the adjusted <br /> allocation be reserved for smaller expansions. <br /> • The text would also be amended to state that any development requesting <br /> flexibility would need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The current <br /> plan allows some projects to be approved by the Zoning Administrator. All <br /> Planning Commission decisions are appealable to the City Council. <br /> Furthermore, the City Council can also "call a project up" for Council review when <br /> requested by two or more Council Members. <br /> • The General Plan and DTPP text changes would require Planning Commission <br /> and City Council review and approval. It is expected that this review would occur <br /> in early 2015. <br /> • Projects that are currently under review that do not qualify under current <br /> Maximum Allowable Development limitations but do fit within the adjusted <br /> allocations, would only be able to obtain a building permit after the Council <br /> adopts the necessary General Plan and Precise Plan amendments. Projects that <br /> do not fit within the current or adjusted MAD would be required to propose a <br /> separate General Plan and DTPP amendment, as well as conduct a separate <br /> environmental review (see alternative 1 below). <br /> Short Term Maximum Allowable Development Modification Alternatives: <br /> There are three potential alternatives to the recommendation above: <br /> 1. The first alternative would be to allow each developer (that has a project in <br /> excess of the MAD limitations) to proceed with separate environmental review, <br /> General Plan amendment and DTPP amendment. While this alternative is <br /> feasible, it would create a more lengthy process for a majority of the projects in <br /> Page 7 of 9 <br />