Laserfiche WebLink
9A <br /> Page 37 <br /> Chair Seybert stated that thare are iwo items that were recommended to the Planning <br /> Comrr�ission and that the Planning Commission needs to take action on. How the developer can <br /> interacts with the neighborhood association potentialfy on private sireeis may be a good idea <br /> and has been done successfully. Separate fram this we can also look at the Use Permit at the <br /> carwash. <br /> Gee stated the Planning Commission recommended approval to City Council an approval of a <br /> project a while back that did require a one year follow-up on parking or traffic counts. Is this <br /> something that we could add to this? <br /> Chair Seybert cited the recent Stanfard Proiect as an examp{e. <br /> Commissioner Cranin macte a motion to adopt the negative declaration and make the findings <br /> tha# were praduced in the staff report and add what we just discussed to include a traffic <br /> monitoring program, and at the appropriate time, we would review the traffic monitoring report <br /> wnen ii is completed. <br /> Mr. Aranda added and the Planning Commission agreed to make the additional finding that on <br /> the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the project will <br /> have a significant effect on the environment. <br /> Commissioner Gee offered a friendly amendment that the traffic study occur one year after <br /> occupancy with traffic counts at Kentfield and Woodside, Norgan and Woodside, and Newcastle <br /> and Hargan, to determsne if there have been any significant impacts. <br /> Commissioner Seybert stated that #his is simply a step in the process to aflow additional <br /> monitoring of the situation. <br /> Commissioner Cronin accepted the amendment to the motion. <br /> Ms. Riordan pointed out that the traffic study detsrmined that there won't be a significant impact <br /> so there is no need ta monitor if there are no significant impacts after the proiect is compfeted. <br /> There will always be impacts with development, but there is a huge difFerence if the impact is <br /> significant, whether you have to wait a couple of seconds ar 15 minutes to get out of the <br /> intersection or whatever it is that pulls it over into a significant impact. Ms. Riordan believes#hat <br /> what the Planning Commission wants staif to do is just make sure the neighborhaod is working <br /> right. <br /> Assistant City Attarney Aranda added io examine the effect at a later date, the Planning <br /> Commission might be invalidating the findings made tonight, with regards to the fact tha# #here <br /> will be no signifcar.t effec#s. <br /> Chair Seyberk stated that this is to get a better handle on how accurate these studies are being <br /> done. He agrees with the traffic consultant, and generally there are extenuating circumstances <br /> when they are nat accurate. The Planning Commission wants to restudy and review the <br /> situation one year later. <br /> Commissioner Cronin and Gee reaffirm the motion with the amendments. <br /> Commissioner Codding added that he's not sure if we do another study about impacts a year <br /> from now, whether anything can be dane once the praject is built. He has no problem with <br /> looking back at what's happened and getting some feedback, but he was uncertain what anyone <br /> could do at that point. <br /> Page 10 of 12 <br />