Laserfiche WebLink
9A <br /> Page 38 <br /> Chair Seybert respanded that he's not certain eifher, which is precisely why he's not suggesting <br /> a fist of thing that the f'lanning Commission wouid do; nowever, it's sfiii imporkant to iook at it. <br /> ln response to a clarifying question by Commissioner Bargens, Chair Seybert responded that by <br /> voting yes on this motion, the Planning Commission certifiss, based on afl of the +nformatian <br /> provided to them, that the mifigated negative declaration meets the three findings set forth in the <br /> staff report, adds the amendment about additional review and adds the additional finding read <br /> by the Assistant City Attorney. <br /> M/S (Cronin/ Gee)to adopt the negative declaration and make the findings that were produced <br /> in the staff report and what was discussed. The motion would a1sQ include a traffic monitoring <br /> program at the appropriate time, once the traffic monitoring report was corr�pleted, and :ha� the <br /> traffic study occur around one year after accupancy with traffic counts at Kentfield and <br /> Woodside, Norgan and Woodside, and Newcastle and Horgan, to determine if there have been <br /> any significant impacis. i he rlanning Commission would fike to re-study t�at in aba�t a year, <br /> because#here may need to be mitigation measure added. <br /> Motion Passed 7-0 <br /> M/S (Radcliffe/Gee) moves to recommend that the City Council adopt the Precise Plan subject <br /> to the conditians and based on the finding outlined in the staff report. This plan shows superior <br /> mixed use design, incorporation of affordable housing, transportation demand managsment, <br /> and incorporation of public or community facilities, efficient and innovative use of infrastructure <br /> and nonrenewable resources, and innovative use of shared parking. <br /> Mo#ion Passed 5-2 (Borgens & Codding against} <br /> Commissioner Radcliffe asked how the Planning Commission will deal with going back and <br /> looking at the Use Permit for the car wash. <br /> Ms. Riardan stated that that can be handled separately frorn the project. <br /> Chair S�vbert suggested that the Planning Commission get a brief written repart from staff with <br /> a timeline of when that would happen maybe by our next meeting. <br /> Commissioner Borgens stated that she likes the projects laok, but she wifl be voting against this <br /> because she is not camfortable with the study on the transportation or the safety issue that she <br /> has heard tonight. This is a difFicult decision for me because we need housing and Woodside <br /> R�a�+ is the rl�ce to �u# it and it's a beautiful project. <br /> Commissioner Codding stated that he is voting against the Precise Plan and has concerns <br /> about safety and traffic at that particular intersection and #his does not satisfy the transportation <br /> demand management. <br /> Chair Seybert clarified that the motion does not suggest that the project demQnstrates ali six of <br /> those featured; it states that it demonstrates three ar more of them. I agree, it doesn't <br /> demonstrate Transportation Demand Management in#he true TDM form. <br /> Cammissioner Cronin is in support of the project because the City needs housing in many <br /> places and this is a good project and is supportive of the affordable housing component that is <br /> voluntarily being added to tttis. We need that in the City as well. I do trust the results of #he <br /> studies that were presenteci to us and there does indicate to be no significant impact from traffic. <br /> Page11of12 <br />