CC MIN 06-08- to 12-21-1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Rle the Port area and what the Board of Port Commissioners may do in the Port area are rather broad; that in the Charter, it is possible to interpret the "Port area" as being very extensive, extending into highly developed residential areas of the City. He also noted that the existence of a definition of a "port area" will have no effect whatever on the jurisdiction VOW of the Planning Commission to plan for the City of Redwood City; that its authority and jurisdiction come from the State Planning Act and the Zoning Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act. etc. Mr. Schricker also indicated that his purpose in going into more detail in his letter with regard to what the Charter says about the Port was to make the Commissioners more aware of those portions of the Charter relating to the Port, because of increasing intensity of land development and use, the involvement of environmental interests versus development interests, as well as municipal interests and the interests of other layers of government, that attention has been focused on the Port and waterfront area in recent years and has become highly contentious; that any planning authority that the Port Board may have is implied, but that to the extent that any regulations or authority is exercised by the Board of Port Commissioners in the port area, it must always relate to development and operation of maritime commerce and navigation, so that it is a special, narrow band of authority; that the Charter simply reflects an acknowledgement that the Port-owned property and the port area surrounding it is meant to be devoted to maritime commerce. Mayor Biagi asked Mr. Schricker whether, once the Committee reaches an agreement as to refining the jurisdiction of the Port area, a Charter amendment would be required. Mr. Schricker advised that he did not believe it would be necessary, that whatever agreement is reached would be a matter of implementing what the Charter defines as the "port area"; that the Charter speaks in terms of lands fronting on Redwood Creek, streams tributary to Redwood Creek, lands fronting on the Bay, with the exception of lands within which Redwood City is located, but that there has to be a practical interpretation of that. Discussion followed and Mr. Schricker commented and replied to questions 11,111 regarding the fact that the Committee assignment is to define an area of land within which the Port Board reasonably might exercise its authority. This authority would include the exercise of eminent domain, regulation of Sri public utilities, approval authority over franchises granted by the City, the opening of streets, the construction of public utilities and facilities in the Port area, which if planned or approved by the City Council, must be approved by the.Port Board if it is in the Port area. Mr. Schricker noted that what he believed the Port is concerned about, and in fact, the Council and Planning Commission as well, is the question of whether there should be some kind of agreement, or compact, between the Port and the City with respect to land use in the Port area. For instance, the Port is increasingly contacted by private enterprise with respect to potential use of lands adjacent to the Port, and if that is for a high rise residential use versus another type of use such as a facility adjacent to the Port which would ship through the Port, thus generating revenue for the Port, from a policy standpoint, there should be some agreement as to what land use might be permitted. He noted that the Charter recognized that there is to be a port, and of a particular kind, basically a deep water port. Discussion which followed related to the fact that the process of hearings on the Piombo Floating Homes project was far along before a reaction was received from the Port; that the involvement by the Port Board in a proposed development of 80+ acres east of the Port, for which the Planning Commission has just requested BCDC approval, would be only to the extent of allocation of sewage treatment capacity and some land acquisition. GENERAL General discussion related to the ongoing revisions to the General Plan, and with the amended Housing Element now completed, the Planning Commission intends to consider next the Open Space and Land Use Elements. As part of the Land Use Element, Council recalled their earlier referral to the Planning Commission of their request for a review of the designation of wool "tidal plain" for lands east of Bayshore Freeway, suggesting "urban reserve" or similar term be substituted both in the General Plan and in the Zoning Ordinance. wage Jnt.Mtg. Council/Plug. 11/24/81 Page 3