Mr. Sensenig responded that the plan is very specific in terms of the design
requirements, but timing of development activities could be delayed due to the
current and/or future economic conditions. Commissioner Wang asked how the plan
ensures continuity and cohesion between the ecological and park areas being
developed by different property owners or developers. Mr. Sensenig clarified that
these elements are required in the areas identified as the plan, with some flexibility
where there are single vs multiple property owners. There are design specifications
for each open space area, for block size and characteristics, and requirements for
canopy cover that help ensure the cohesion. Commissioner Wang asked what the
impact on air quality might be as population in this area increases. Ms. Weis
explained the air quality assessment components. She clarified that the Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) found that the construction activities to develop
MPSP area to the plan design standards would result in significant and unavoidable
impacts. The specific plan includes requirements for developers to implement
mitigation measures to reduce this impact to the greatest extent possible. Mr. Reyff
clarified that the assessment also included an analysis of the impacts of current
sources of air pollution and how to avoid future development being impacted by
these current sources. Commissioner Wang inquired about the areas on and near
Lockheed Marin’s property and whether the City anticipates Lockheed will develop
those areas. Mr. Sensenig clarified that there is a portion of that area that Lockheed
can develop or that they can transfer to another area of the MPSP, while the
northernmost part indicated for park or open space cannot be developed. The
optional development area is an incentive for Lockheed to not develop the area, by
being able to transfer it. Ms. Cha clarified that these areas and boundaries were
developed with significant input from Lockheed as well as environmental groups.
Commissioner Nabhan inquired about volume of anticipated demolition and required
recycling rates. Ms. Weis clarified that the City requires 65% of construction and
demolition waste. Ms. Cha clarified that they are unable to calculate the volume of
demolition expected.
Vice Chair Kunz asked for clarification on how the MPSP aligns with and supports
current City goals and policies and whether there are metrics that show this
alignment. Ms. Cha explained that they do not have metrics showing what full build
out of this plan would help achieve in regard to the City’s plans and policies. Vice
Chair Kunz encouraged the team to develop them to better support the MPSP. Vice
Chair Kunz also inquired about how the various policies and goals are being
balanced. Mr. Mendrin clarified that some of those specific conflicts are resolved at
the design standard level. Mr. Sensenig clarified that they took a very holistic
approach to ensuring that this plan improves the area in line with the City’s vision.
Vice Chair Kunz asked how much parking surface area there currently is in the plan
