Laserfiche WebLink
9A <br /> Page 4 <br /> Staff received very little public input on the proposed project until close to the <br /> November 28�' P[anning Commission hearing date, at which time staff began to <br /> receive emails, letters and petitions from neighborhood residents.A significant number <br /> of the residents also attended the Planning Commission hearing to express their <br /> concerns and to submit a Homeowner Association petition againsi the project. <br /> While the 30-day public review period forthe Mitigated Negative Declaration ended on <br /> November 28�' and while al1 of the neighborhood's project-relatad environmental <br /> concerns described in this report have been addressed (i.e. the Mitigated Negative <br /> Declaration has determined that the project wifl have no significant environmentaC <br /> impacts with the mitigation measures recommended in the analysis), staff wanted to <br /> update the Counci( regarding neighborhood concerns expressed at the Pianning <br /> Commission hearing. These concems are summarized below: <br /> ■ Project reiated traffic impacts on the adjacent neighborhaods; <br /> ■ Height and density of the propased project; <br /> ■ Sai! an� �roun� watpr cantamina±;on #r�m a pa�t gasoline �pill at the <br /> adjacent gas station; <br /> ■ Solar access, privacy and property values of adjacent single-family <br /> residential properties; <br /> ■ Existing neighborhood conditions of traffc circulation, parking, and potential <br /> safety impac#s pertaining to the nearby car wash and nursery school and to a <br /> neighborhood park on Newcastle Street; <br /> ■ Concern expressed by some neighbors that the praject traffic study was not <br /> adequa#e and that the environmental review (a Mitigated Negative <br /> Declaration} shauld be expanded. <br /> Refer to the Planning Commission Minutes in Afitachment 4B for more detail. The <br /> Commission's action on the Mitigated Negative Declarafiion was n�t appealed. <br /> E On February 12, 2007 (or shortly thereafter), the City received a letter from Hannig <br /> Law Firm (re�resenting the Hampton Oaks Association) requesting a delayed City <br /> Council hearing in April in order to provide the Association with adequate time to <br /> prepare a critique of the Mitiga#ed Negative Declaration. The City accommodated this <br /> request by delaying the Councii hearing to Apri!9t"even thaugh the Mitigated Negative <br /> Declaration determ:ned ±hat pro;ect impacts are irts:gnificant as m�tigated and the <br /> appeal period is over. The Ffannig Law �irm letter and a response letter from the <br /> developer's attorney, Cox Castle Nicholson, are included in Attachment 5. <br /> ■ On March 7, 2007, the City spansored a community workshop, facilitated by the <br /> Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center, as staff determined that more communication <br /> with the neighborhood about the project Precise Plan was needed. Attachment 6 <br /> includes the fuEl transcription o# the workshop comments from faci{itated table <br /> discussions, which included participation by about 34 attendees. Notices for this <br /> meeting were sent to property owners within 304 feet of the praject site and ta <br /> Homeowners Associations. Staff coordinated with homeowner association presidents <br /> provided to staff by one of the neighborhoad residents to further distribute the meeting <br /> notices to residents. The Community Workshop was a(so posted on fihe City's website. <br /> 4 <br />