My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2003-08-25
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2003
>
AgdaPkt 2003-08-25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2011 2:26:21 PM
Creation date
8/21/2003 3:19:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Agency Type
City Council
Date
8/25/2003
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
260
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
� 4041 <br />Mr. Chang said there is a technical memo which will be circulated within the next two <br />weeks. <br />Commissioner McCoy noted that the Water Consumption projection is down by 75 %, <br />and �r sked Mr. Chang if he did a similar projection on the Was; water Projection? <br />Mr. Chang said the percentage is different (85 -95 %), based on type of building. <br />Commissioner McCoy said the numbers do not add up, and questioned the projection <br />calculations. <br />Mr. Chang said he did not go over the projected calculation, so it could be inaccurate. <br />He said in general the concept is that the new sewer demand projection (excluding <br />outdoor water usage) will be approximately 95% of the water projection. <br />Commissioner McCoy wanted to know if the Number 209,259 gpd seen on the <br />Addendum was only the indoor usage. <br />Mr. Chang said it includes everything, even a portion of the landscape projection. <br />Commissioner McCoy asked if there any allowance for the use of recycled water for <br />landscape irrigation. <br />Mr. Chang said recycled water is not in the picture, because it depends on the program. <br />Even if recycled water comes in, it will most likely replace the outdoor portion of the <br />WDP. <br />Commissioner Seybert noted the WDP for open space is 2,700 gpd, and asked if the <br />2.666 gpd is what would be provided. <br />Mr. Chang said that the recycled water would replace that projection. <br />Commissioner Seybert commented on construction phasing regarding a statement on <br />page 9 of the Precise Plan under Precise Plan Issues & Goals — "Kaiser's planned <br />investment in the area dwarfs any other private developments envisioned in coming <br />decades." He referred to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (page 1 of the <br />EIR) which states, "... between phases, if the zone is not scheduled for construction <br />activity or will remain "unused" for a period greater than six months... ". His concern <br />was the term "unused" and wants it clarified that if unused for a period of six months, <br />and is going to remain unused for a professional, public, or active construction use, it <br />needs to be treated so there are no empty lots fenced -off for several years, leaving it <br />debatable as to its use. <br />Commissioner Seybert said the EIR refers to the Community Development Director <br />being the one that determines what the appearance of the unimproved or in between <br />phases will be. He suggested that the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) be the <br />' dog" for what the "unused" space looks like in between phases. <br />Commissioner McCoy wanted to know what to make of the letter from Kaiser on pages <br />3 -29 to 3 -38 in the Response to Comments, which pointed out disagreements with the <br />position taken by the City, and the rebuffs by the Consultant. <br />Page 4 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.