CC Min 1996-08-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

. . I . - larger) Council packet that I was handed Thursday night that I read very thoroughly. I find that first of all, morally I have a problem with this. The plaintiffs in the case, the - Pilots Association and Redwood Shores Homeowners Association made no indications during the long deliberations of the Planning Commission meetings or at Council meetings that they were willing to compromise with any of the issues. That really disturbs me. If they had been willing to compromise I think the City Council en masse, I will not speak for my colleagues, but I think we would have had a much different approach to this situation. I said from the very beginning that if the FAA did not consider the 150' height limit a problem then I would not, but if they did, then I would. And I think the President of the Pilots Association as the Mayor pointed out agreed with that statement. The FAA decided that the 150' height limit was not a problem. Mr. White and his associates represent less than one one hundredth of a percent of the population of Redwood City, and they have forced by smoking gun, called a lawsuit, something that I find very distasteful. I call it blackmail. And there is a point that I will no longer vote for compromise. I have reached that point...." Mayor Hartnett said "I am going to support the motions and resolution, ordinance and changes. I think that Councilman Claire is correct with respect to the issue of the expressed inability of the opponents of the project to compromise before the City Council took action. I see the Agreement, however, as in a sense, ratification of the Council's determination of approval on this. I see it also as ultimately a business decision on the part of the project proponent to create an aura of certainty so that the project can proceed apace, and business objectives can be attained within the limits of - public policy as established by the City of Redwood City.... The Agreement voluntarily entered into does result in no building in the project being more than 130' in height. There will be multiple buildings that are in height in excess of 100'. This is a compromise that has been agreed to by the Pilots Association and the Homeowners Association, the same people who told us that any building in excess of 100' was a threat to safety. We took independent professional advice. We considered the matter very carefully. We obtained the determination of the FAA that a height of 150' was not a hazard, not a safety issue. We made our determination based on that. In fact I see that the compromise that has been agreed to by' the Pilots Association and Homeowners Association is in fact a ratification of the Council's view with respect to the issue of safety. The fact that the project proponents, Electronic Arts, has agreed to reduce the building height from ISO' to 130' simply is a business decision that from their perspective keeps the project's integrity in tact, and allows them to go forward in the building of their project to accomplish their business objectives. Their business objectives coincide with the public policy of the City of Redwood City. So I think we certainly can approve the revisions as suggested in that regard. Secondly, the project opponents did make much comment with the respect to the issue of the Environmental Impact Report not fully considering traffic and other impacts, and I think it is quite notable that the settlement of the law suit as a result of the Agreement entered into by the parties, makes no changes in that regard, makes no suggested revisions to the - Development Agreement that would require any additional traffic mitigation engaged in by the project proponent or by the City. And I see that too as a ratification of the REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 54 AUGUST 26,1996 MINUTES paqe No. 454 PAGEl?