Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Geneva Commons Project <br />April 4, 2005 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />9. Adding Planning Division Condition No. 18 to Conditional Use Permit <br />No. 2004-24 to require each unit to have cast iron drain lines to <br />improve interior noise attenuation; <br /> <br />10. Adding Planning Division Condition No. 19 to Conditional Use Permit <br />No. 2004-24 to require cable and smart wiring within each unit; <br /> <br />11. Amending Planning Division Mitigation Measure No. 65 (renumbered as <br />No. 68) of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-24 to include language <br />related to the City Council overrule of the Airport Land Use <br />Commissions determination; and, <br /> <br />12. Amending Police Department Condition No.7 of Conditional Use Permit <br />No. 2004-24 to allow the use of convex mirrors on the elevators <br />instead of glass backed elevator cabs. <br /> <br />Since the Planning Commission's action, two other significant amendments <br />have been made to the development agreement. The first amendment <br />(Section 5.8.4) is the requirement of an avigation easement on the <br />development. The easement is intended to prevent claims, actions or <br />lawsuits for nuisance or interference with the use of the property such as <br />noise, sound, vibration, dust or other environmental effects related to <br />aircraft operations. The City will be the benefited party in the avigation <br />easement, which can be assigned by the City to a third party. The <br />applicant is aware of this requirement and is supportive of this amendment. <br />The second amendment [Section 5.2(c)] involves the project's participation <br />in a community facilities district or assessment. If formed, the district <br />will be used to pay for city services such as police, fire and parks <br />generated from the development of the project. <br /> <br />Public Works Issue/Median Cut <br /> <br />At a prior Planning Commission study session, a discussion was held on <br />the feasibility of providing a median cut on Imperial Promenade at the <br />motor court. Based on the input received from the Commission, the <br />applicant revised the plans to include a median cut, which was eventually <br />approved by the Commission without discussion. Subsequent to the <br />Commission action, the Public Works Agency noted reservations about the <br />median cut due to safety concerns, specifically with vertical sight <br />distance. For instance, vehicles traveling westbound on Imperial <br />Promenade will not see vehicles turning left out of the motor court until <br />the last minute due to the sloping of Imperial Promenade. The Public <br />Works Agency is recommending that the median cut not be permitted due to <br />this traffic safety concern. <br /> <br />75C-4 <br />