Laserfiche WebLink
9A <br /> Page 3 <br /> ■ On June 27�' and September 12"', 2006, the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) <br /> reviewed and recommended approval of the project architecture. The ARC meetings <br /> are not noticed, however, agendas are posted at City Hall and on the City's web site. <br /> ■ On November 28, 2006, after a 30-day public review period,the Planning Commission <br /> hefd a public hearing and adopted the Mitigated Negative Decfaration (environmenfiaf <br /> anafysis) prepared for the Precise Plan, Zoning Map Amendment, and the associated <br /> project. The Pfanning Commission alsa recommended approval of the project Precise <br /> Plan to the City Council. <br /> While the Planning Commission adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and <br /> recommended Councif approval of the Precise Plan, they did not make a separate <br /> motian to re-zone the prope�ty. Therefore,the rezoning of the real nroperty is not now <br /> before #he City Council. <br /> It should be noted that three letters were received from state agencies after the <br /> Plarning Commission's action on Novemb°r 2R, 2(?�5. The !etters are provided in <br /> Attachment 4A and include twa letters from the Department of Transpor�ation <br /> (Caltrans) and one letter from the Department of Taxic Substance Control (DTSC). <br /> The City is not required to respond to letters received after the comment period; <br /> however, Redwood City has trat4itionalfy done so to be responsive to state agencies. <br /> With respect to the December 12, 2006(etter from the Caltrans, mos#of the comments <br /> are of a standard nature about project review and typical conditiors of approval and <br /> standard practices. One comment was made about the traffic analysis itself, <br /> specifically with respect to the addition of 12 to 14 U-turns during the PM peak hour at <br /> the signalized intersection of Kentfie(d and Woodside Road.The City's traffic engineer <br /> and the traffic consultant to the City for this project, Hexagon Transportation <br /> Consultants Inc., reviewed the camment and determined that this level of additional <br /> traffic would have a negligible effect on the intersection operations. A response to this <br /> Ca4trans letter was not warranted. Caltrans' second letter(received January 10,2007) <br /> contains a comment regarding stormwater run-off. The Negative Declaration included <br /> a m;±igation measure that addresses this issue. F:�r�herr�ore, c�rainage and grading <br /> plans are subject to review and approval by the City's Engineering and Construc#ion <br /> Division. The City Engineer wi(!ensure that communicatian with Caltrans proceeds as <br /> is customary for construction along State Highways. The ietter from DTSC was <br /> r�ceived on December 8, 2006. [t was replied to on behalf of±he City by RemPdiation <br /> Testing and Design {RTD} on February 13, 2007, and this respanse is included in <br /> Attachment 4A. DTSC had no further comment. <br /> Hearing notices for the November 28�' Planning Commission hearing were sent to <br /> property owners within 300 feet of the project site and published in the Redwood City <br /> Daily News. The Environmental document and Precise Plan were also posted on the <br /> City's website 30 days prior to the Planning Commission hearing. <br /> 3 <br />