Laserfiche WebLink
9.B. - Page 20 <br /> the planning pipeline. Furthermore, the City is only allowed to approve four (4) <br /> General Plan amendments per year and processing all requests may not be <br /> possible and would limit other City business. This may be the most suitable <br /> alternative, however, for upcoming or recently submitted projects that do not fit <br /> within the adjusted MAD allocation, but still wish to proceed with their application. <br /> 2. The second alternative would take this General Plan limitation into consideration. <br /> The City could only take forward the General Plan amendment (and do the <br /> associated environmental work) and require that each developer process their <br /> own DTPP amendment. While this is more desirable than Alternative 1, staff <br /> does not believe this is the best alternative, as it would delay DTPP <br /> implementation and would create a more lengthy process as well. <br /> 3. The third alternative would be to simply raise the maximum office development <br /> allocation, without adjusting the other development allocations. This would <br /> require further detailed environmental review. Staff does not recommend this <br /> alternative at this time, as this could be accomplished (if desired) during a <br /> Downtown Precise Plan, Phase 2 or by individual applications as noted above. <br /> Projects that Do Not Fit within Current or Adjusted MAD Allocations <br /> It is likely that not all projects currently in the planning "pipeline" will be able to fit under <br /> the adjusted MAD allocations. This will be studied during the environmental review <br /> period. If this proves to be the case, project applicants whose projects exceed the <br /> adjusted MAD allocations may still proceed with their projects. However, as described <br /> above, these projects will require individual General Plan and DTPP amendments, and <br /> must undergo separate environmental review. <br /> Long Term Strategy <br /> City staff will be bringing options for Downtown Precise Plan Phase 2. This would occur <br /> after the adjustments are made, most likely in early 2015. <br /> ALTERNATIVES <br /> Please see alternatives above for the Maximum Allowable Development "Reservation" <br /> process and the Maximum Allowable Development limitation modifications. <br /> FISCAL IMPACT <br /> It is expected the environmental work associated with adjustments to the Maximum <br /> Allowable Development allocations described above would cost approximately $60,000. <br /> A significant amount of staff work is also involved in implementing and modifying the <br /> DTPP. <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW <br /> The Downtown Precise Plan Environmental Impact Report was adopted by the City <br /> Council in 2011. Any modifications made to the adopted DTPP will be completed in full <br /> compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This action to direct <br /> staff to further study potential Downtown Precise Plan modification is not considered a <br /> Page 8 of 9 <br />