PC 042308 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding the number of potential students generated from this prof ect, Ms. Decker replied that staff did not have that information and that the School District calculated that figure based on the number of children per unit. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether the traffic study included theoretical trips to school sites, or whether the traffic data excluded the school trips, Mr. Otto replied that the traffic study included all trips from a residential unit. He noted that it would include trips to the school, to the store, and to work, as calculated in the traffic figures. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether ten trips per unit were assumed, Mr. Otto replied that a different calculation was used for an apartment complex than for asingle-family home. Commissioner Fox noted that on page 28 of the Negative Declaration, it is stated that there is less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated for exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of the standard established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies. She added that the staff report discussed the private open space for the units facing the freeway had been eliminated. She inquired whether this assumption meant that the freeway-facing units would have all the windows closed at all times to make that less than significant, with mitigation incorporated. Mr. Otto replied that was correct, and that was a typical noise mitigation, whether it be for a freeway, train tracks or aircraft. He noted that the interior noise level of 45 dB must be met, assuming that the doors and windows would be closed, that may also have a special noise rating for the windows to meet the General Plan requirement. Commissioner Fox inquired whether the affordable units would be spread across the complex or grouped in one area. Mr. Otto replied that the administrative hearing agreement requires that the affordable units be randomly distributed throughout the project site; the applicant would work with the City's housing specialist with respect to the specific placement of the units. Commissioner Fox noted that the staff report discussed the urban grocery store as an allowed use. She inquired whether it would be possible to make it a mandatory component of the project as opposed to an allowable use. She believed that without a grocery story, there would be more traffic generated from this development because the needed on-site services would not be available to support the project. Mr. Otto replied that the desire was to have a grocery store on- site in order to minimize trips and added that staff did not wish to limit this prof ect to that use only, should they be unable to have a grocery tenant, resulting in vacant retail space. He confirmed that the City would not require the presence of a grocery store. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Eric Heffner, Windstar Communities, Inc., applicant, noted that they were ready to move forward with the conditions of approval. He introduced the team of consultants and noted that they were prepared to answer any questions posed by the Planning Commission. He acknowledged John Reynolds from BART, who had been involved with the project for the last seven years and who also acted as the landlord on this property. He noted that they had a close PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 23, 2008 Page 14 of 28