RES 01063 - Laserfiche WebLink

direCtions would likely see a very small increase, but one that can be controlled ukrough a fo~med '~M pm~'mm. ~ fou~ ~ archiu~lture ofthe ~ to be suikia~ interesting, and well-designed. Given tbs bro~d context of north Ple~mlon,.staff found it appropriate. The Planning Co~uniss~n, however, narrowed the focus to the Hopyard Road viewpoint and found the buildin._~ happropriate give its context. Staff can certainlY see the Commission's point, but staff continues to note that in a broader context the building is appropriate. · In sum the project presents a number of issues which,have differem resolutions depending upo~ how one views the questiom. F. xisti~ land use policy vs. investigation of a con~pl~, compstible use. Possibly slightly increased peak movement traffic at key intersections vs. an overall reduction of site-based traffic. Striking architecture vs. receding, blel~l-in-with-the-landscape architecture. Architectural compatibili/~, at a narrow or broad focus. HOw the Council chooses to view these issues will result in different outcomes. C~'S OFrlONS The Couacil has the following general optiom: a. With respect to land use: A~ree with the appellant that the office use is appropriate and allow tile proposed use; Agree with the Planning Commission that a formal market analysis to determine the most appropriate use for the site is necessary before adjusting the zoning accordingly; or Initiate a rezoning tO modi~ the zoning of the parcel to an appropriam use, as determined by the Council. b. With respect to traffic impacts: .¸ A~l'ee with the appellant that the proposed TSM measures will result in a reduction of ten outbound trips d,urin~ the PM peak, wl'dch is mfficient to balance.the ~ps generated by the proposed development when, compared to trips from the existi~ restaurant use; Request the appellant to implement enhanced TSM measures, such as staggered work hours, telecommuting, providing a BART shuttle to SRO1:069 Page 5