The project, said Gonzales, is still too dense and 70 units would be more suitable.Several public speakers offered support of the project and the positive affect it would have, especially on children used to living in overcrowded conditions. Councilman Dr. Gabino Aguirre agreed and, “Speaking as an educator,” the positive impacts of a “stable household” are more likely to produce “future leaders.”Councilman Fred Robinson said he was opposed to the larger project, but “CEDC is a quality organization that will build and manage a quality project... is it a perfect project? No, but it’s not a perfect world,” and Robinson said he is still concerned with the safety of children living close to the railroad tracks.“I was initially opposed to the project, but I want to clarify something,” and Gonzales said “It was never a personal issue with me and any of the officers of CEDC. I was elected by people who trusted I would do the best thing for the community overall,” and he wanted to counter comments that the issue had become personal on his part.The property had been zoned light industrial and “should be kept that way,” as manufacturing would “not be a drain on the community,” and traffic as well as impacts to area schools would be minimized. Although CEDC will pay an annual $16,000 to the city to make up for lost property taxes and initial impact school fees, Gonzales said thereafter the latter will not have a source of ongoing income generated by the project.“I am not against low-income housing, I’m not against helping people,” and Vice Mayor Jim Tovias said he wants the city to have more disposable income and higher property values to ensure services. Alluding to earlier comments by a construction union representative, Tovias said, “A selling feature also is we are going to be using local labor.”Construction is due to begin in 2010, with the first Paseo Santa Barbara units opening by the end of the year.