01 - Laserfiche WebLink

General Plan policy is optional and the Council can decide to adopt it or not pursue it. Mr. Fialho indicated staff is comfortable with this language because Program 9.1 is currently in the proposed Housing Element and it attaches that policy to the mitigation. He added that staff is proposing to bring forward a discussion in February regarding growth management and water supply in the valley. Councilmember McGovern said she was glad this was brought forward because when she read the Final EIR, page 14 indicates that Zone 7's 2011 annual review raises concern about providing water to new customers after 2015 and another area talks about Zone 7's imported water supply, which will be brought back to pre-2008. Councilmembers Sullivan and McGovern said they had the same question about traffic, noting that the payment of fees do not always result in traffic improvements. Mr. Fialho suggested duplicating that language in the traffic section. Councilmember McGovern said under traffic, it talks about significant and unavoidable impacts as being Sunol Boulevard/First Street between Vineyard Avenue and Stanley Boulevard and Hopyard Road between Owens Drive and 1-580. The problem with CDBG funds are that they are politically assigned and she would hope the City could find a way of tying noise attenuation to those two areas and try to at least give that area some reduction in the decibels of noise. She suggested doing something more urgent rather than waiting for fees to be collected. Mr. Dolan said there are ways to do this. The City must be aware that it can only assign mitigation to measure it with the impact. On well-traveled streets like this, the City could collect an impact fee and measure it with the developer's contribution, although the rest of the community is already generating 90% of the noise. Councilmember McGovern noted noise attenuation studies are done with CIP projects and if fees collected could be used to provide the community with some knowledge that it will be addressed aggressively. Mr. Fialho pointed out that the Council has done this by way of policy. The City has committed that overlay projects on all major thoroughfares will be done with noise attenuation, and for the record, the Council could identify there are other means to help this in this area. He said staff could easily insert language into the traffic section of the mitigation plan, and Councilmembers agreed with this suggested language. Councilmember McGovern referred to noise and significant impacts and construction on Saturdays is also identified. She wondered if there is a way to limit construction on Saturdays to inside buildings, as there are existing neighborhoods next to projects and many are quite large. Mr. Dolan said staff has struggled with this issue, as well as the Planning Commission. With a mitigation that is so prescriptive, staff will always encounter situations where there is a good reason not to do it. The most recent example was that the Safeway targeted opening before the holidays which would not have happened without working on Saturdays. The community was very patient, they worked creatively to make it tolerable for most, but if the City ties itself down with that specific language it makes it difficult when getting into certain situations. Councilmember McGovern also expressed concerns with schools and page 4.9 which is the original General Plan EIR which talks about school enrollments as being less than significant. She is concerned that the City needs to talk with the school district, be stronger and asked to arrive at ideas of how they can work together with this amount of development to assure it will be less than significant. Mr. Fialho agreed with these facts, but he continues to state that the City's ability to mitigate school impacts is limited by State law. The tactic taken is that the City needs to adopt where the impacts from rezonings will be and once they know affirmatively that the action is taken they can work with the City on the acquisition of the 10th elementary school. He added that school administration agrees with this approach and engaging in discussions during public and liaison meetings is something the City will continue to do. City Council Minutes Page 6 of 13 January 4, 2012