. >> commissioner morore? >> i have read through the responses, and since the project has been conducted tightly, i believe the eir is complete and accurate, and i think it is solid in its basic position, and i moved and we approve it. >> second. >> i was about to move it, but it has already been moved. >> on the motion to certify the eir. [calling votes] so moved that the motion passes unanimously, 7-0. i will now place you under your 5:00 and regular calendar for items a, b, c, d, and e for the executive who general plan amendments and to design guidelines. >> i am not snyder of the department's staff. before your are -- i am matt snyder of the department staff. the proposed amendments are to enable the transformation of the office park portion of this site into an excuse predominate neighborhood. there are five factions before you tonight. the approval is to allow development but to not approve actual projects. we have been before you to provide information. on march 17, we gave the history on the proposed

>> commissioner morore and i had this conversation it is a design a solution -- had this conversation. it is a design evolution. it is not a problem for my client. the director thinks there is a possibility to ensure the commission can approve the project and has the latitude to impact, and my inclination is i do not think there is. we need to confirm that. it is not a problem. >> we have talked about that. they will have to definitely to the examination in order to justify it. i think it is not a big deal, according to the conversation we had. we would have to take the step first, but it does not delay the project for months. it is a focus examination, and it does not seem to be a big deal at the moment. comissioner sugaya: i would think there could be a possibility that it is minor enough it does not have to be amended. >> i think it would be an addendum. comissioner antonini: i am to land use lawyer. i do not disagree with anything that has been said, but i want to make sure our understanding is your understanding. and we are happy to incur the additional costs to study whether the

commissioner olague: commissioner morore. commissioner moore: just as a matter of fair play, to continue, could you object if you tell us that communications, if applicant communication has been erratic or date? is there any animosity that we would have to use as a base for things -- for a pack of letters -- better words, taking advantage? >> interesting question. we have had a number of meetings with the dr requester. we are shocked that he is not here. we thought he wanted to raise some issues. we do not know why he does not formally ask for a continuance. there were two dr's originally filed. if it was not for this project, we would not be here taking up your time. we would be going to the zoning administrator for a minor forbearance. but now he is not even here and we are being told days before the hearing. >> the only thing i would appreciate for a continuance is an unexpected event in the family or something. we all know that things can be extremely erratic these days. however, in the absence of that, i feel pressed to