CCMIN080613SP - Laserfiche WebLink

with 5 person households. While not technically consistent with the ordinance, it is typical with past practice. Concessions relative to unit mix are also consistent with the Council's direction to be flexible and creative. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio recognized that the proposed in lieu fee is more than currently required but also likely less than would be required following the nexus study. She asked why, if the goal is to provide affordable units, the city would elect to collect the fee instead. Mr. Bocian explained that those funds could potentially be leveraged for a different type of project that might yield even more affordability. Councilmember Brown asked if the portion of the in lieu fee not earmarked for the Lower Income Housing Fund could be spent in other ways, such as a facility to help economically disadvantaged students. Mr. Bocian confirmed that staff's analysis to date is that the portion equivalent to the Lower Income Housing fee should be reserved for lower income housing purposes; the remainder is somewhat open and includes a number of uses. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio asked and Mr. Bocian confirmed that the city retains this flexibility, even if the nexus study were to result in an increase to the current fee. Mr. Bocian clarified that this only applies to transactions finalized before the new fee takes effect. Councilmember Brown asked whether this level of flexibility is typical. Mr. Bocian said he felt it appropriate, regardless of whether or not it is normal, based on the number of moving parts involved in staff's recommendation. Councilmember Narum asked whether exercising the fee option would sacrifice the dedicated accessible units. Mr. Bocian explained that all the units would include universal design to the level required by the building code; however, the special provisions within the AHA that go beyond universal design and relate to how those units are reserved and maintained would no longer apply. City Traffic Engineer Tassano presented the project's traffic analysis. He explained that the transportation analysis conducted as part of the Housing Element's 2011 Environmental Impact Report reviewed all 17 Housing Element sites including this location. The analysis studied 33 separate intersections and 60 roadway segments, and concluded that there were no impacts to the intersections identified. The report did find 2 impacted roadway segments, only one of which relates to the project. The EIR found that the two lane portion of First Street is deficient both with and without the project and that the impacts identified were significant and unavoidable but would be mitigated by regional traffic improvements. In addition to the Housing Element's EIR, each project that comes forward as a result of the Housing Element is subject to a supplemental traffic circulation analysis. The analysis for this project, which was completed in June 2013, identified a set of impacts and mitigation based on internal and external trip generation, site circulation, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, vehicle queues, collision history and trip distribution. Mr. Tassano reviewed the report's discussion on trip generation and distribution, which predicts that the estimated 285 peak hour trips will be distributed as follows: 40% headed north on Valley Avenue, 25% headed west towards First Street, 15% headed to or from Livermore, and 20% headed towards or from City Council Minutes Page 4 of 10 August 6,2013