01 - Laserfiche WebLink

calculations it should also be recognized that SVS employees spend a considerable amount of their day in the field, with the most intense activity periods occurring during off peak office hours before 9 a.m. and then again around 2:30 p.m. With regards to noise, he explained that the adjoining walls would be insulated to an SDC rating of 50. This would require that noise levels within the suite exceed 95 DBA, which would be essentially impossible, in order to exceed the 45 decibel noise standard. He quoted from the property's CC&Rs, which state that "any light industrial, office or warehousing use of the property subject to these restrictions will be permitted provided it is primarily performed or carried out within a building." He stated that the proposed site is an ideal location for several reasons — the primary comings and goings of the operations occur at the rear of the site and will not be visible to the appellant's clients, single-story flex space allows for easy soundproofing of adjacent walls and ADA compliant access, and the proximity to restaurants and businesses helps to familiarize and mainstream clients into everyday activities without heavy reliance upon vehicles. He said he spoke with a commercial realtor regarding the potential impact on property values and her observation was that the appellant would have to disclose this use when selling his property. However, if the disclosure is that the use is essentially unnoticeable then it will have no impact on sales price. Mr. MacDonald stated that the presence of disabled adults does not change the requested land use, which is more than compatible with an office use in terms of all exterior impacts. All members of the Council disclosed meeting with the applicant and/or their legal representation prior to tonight's hearing. Wayne Rudick asked the Council to consider the impact of the proposed project on his company, its employees and its clients. He acknowledged that SVS provides a much needed and valuable service and stressed that his objection relates only to site selection. He noted that SVS' 3 other local sites are located in heavier industrial complexes where noise is of little concern. He said that with an educational background in public health and safety management as well as 30 years professional experience with safety and risk management, he likely has more insight into some of the potential issues and exposures than the average business or property owner. He suggested that if staff felt that SVS' services were truly a benefit to the city then perhaps they should consider locating the training center on city property and adjacent to city offices. He detailed his concerns, beginning with safety and security, stating that SVS cannot guarantee its clients will not demonstrate aggressive behavior. He reported that his visit to the Hayward facility revealed that clients routinely leave the building without supervision and that this site's proximity to heavy traffic could present safety concerns for both clients and other tenants. He expressed concern that the noise attenuating insulation would not sufficiently mitigate noise, which would prove incredibly disruptive to the sensitive business that both he and his tenants conduct. Mr. Rudick discussed his parking concerns, noting that despite staffs parking analysis there have been ongoing issues when some of the currently unoccupied or under-occupied suites reach full occupancy. He noted that staffs own assessment is that SVS may take up to 25 parking spaces at any one time, which exceeds their allotment by the Planning Department based upon square footage. He expressed concern that SVS has secured a 10-year lease and has already indicated a desire to expand well beyond the currently allowed 30 clients per day. He said it is both his opinion and that of commercial real estate brokers that this type of tenant could negatively impact the sale of his portion of the subject site. He also noted that as part of the CUP approval the city has asked to be held harmless and asked that he be extended the same protections as a business and commercial condominium association owner. He reiterated that his objection relates only to the proposed location and thanked the Council for their time and consideration. Vice Mayor Brown asked Mr. Rudick if he would have purchased his unit if the proposed project were preexisting at the site. Mr. Rudick said "no," but added that he also would not have made the purchase if a children's daycare facility or some other similarly disruptive activity were operating there either. City Council Minutes Page 8 of 13 May 5, 2015