Laserfiche WebLink
The roll call vote was as follows: <br />' AYES: Councilmembers- Ayala, Dennis, Michelotti, and Vice Mayor Pico <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Mayor Tarver <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> Item 6b <br /> PUD-80-16-gM/PUD-80-16-14D. C.M. Centerprop <br /> Application for a PUD ma_i or modification and design review approval to allow a four-stor3,_ <br /> approximately 130.000 sq. ft. office building on a vacant 5.63 acre site located at 5050 <br /> Hopyard Road opposite Gllbraltar Drive. Zoning for the property is PUD {Planned Unit <br /> Development) - I/C-O (Industrial/Commercial-Office) DistriCt.(SR97:04) <br /> <br /> Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis agreed a condition regarding trip reduction should be included. She referred <br /> to trip generation towards the Hopyard entrance on 1-580. The applicant felt people would be <br /> more inclined to get on at Hacienda Drive because of the alignment of Gibraltar. There did not <br /> seem to be analysis of that option. Was there any discussion of that? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said it is a question of how the City's model works versus how people might <br /> actually decide to drive. The traffic model specifies what the trip generation will be based on <br /> the shortest time and distance, which is why the assumptions are based on getting off 1-580 at <br /> Hopyard. He then discussed alternative routes that are possible. Every year the Traffic <br /> Engineer reviews actual traffic patterns on the streets and adjusts the model to reflect that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked how the traffic from this project compares to the existing approval for <br /> this property and its impacts on the West Las Positas interchange? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said he could not make that comparison because it is not the same land use and <br /> has a different distribution of traffic. It would take a special model run for this site. In the <br /> future, when new projects come in, staff will do that. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked Mr. Swift to explain why the TSM ordinance is now voluntary. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that the City has had a transportation ordinance since the early <br /> 1980's. That ordinance only requires certain things and the majority of it is voluntary. There <br /> has been excellent voluntary compliance. However, the Air Quality Management District first <br /> adopted a rule which superseded our local ability to require certain aspects of TSM as it relates <br /> to larger businesses. Then State legislation further limited what cities can do with respect to <br /> transportation systems management. Staff is currently reviewing the ordinance. The ordinance <br /> is still in place and there is excellent voluntary compliance. <br /> <br /> 10 1/21/97 <br /> <br /> <br />