CC Min 1993-06-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

A. PUBLIC HEARING to amend the General Plan, adopt a Specific Plan, and amend the Redwood City Zoning Map to all 591 residential units at the eastern end of Redwood peninsula (901-11) REPORT: Redwood City Planning Commission, June 21, 1993 -- Acting Planning Director Passanisi presented the staff report and described how the following issues had been handled: 1) concern over odor and visual nuisance led to moving residences back from the SBSA plant and adding a buffer area; 2) project was submitted to ALUC and CICAG and both agencies advised that the proposed development conformed to their plans; 3) concern over notification of airplane noise and fly overs led to developer agreeing to include notification in the CC&Rs; 4) affordable housing was not included due to the isolation of the development and the massive subsidies that would be required; and 5) Mr. Passanisi advised that the Planning Commission had approved this development. MAYOR BUCHAN DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:35 P.M. AND INVITED ANYONE WHO WISHED TO SPEAK TO PLEASE DO SO. Dan Hall, Vera Street, Redwood City stated that the San Carlos Airport was part of the national transportation system and a valuable asset to the peninsula. Mr. Hall expressed support for an avigation easement. Carol Ford, Bowsprit, Redwood City, pilot, and former president of the Redwood Shores Homeowners Association, advised she was representing a coalition of pilots and homeowners who were in support of an avigation easement that would allow flights to continue without encumbrance. Ms. Ford I stated CC&Rs were useless as nobody read them and expressed her support for I an avigation easement which would remain on the deed and provide notification ._-: to all future buyers. Ms. Ford distributed an information sheet of the Redwood Shores area and the San Carlos Airport area with a copy of noise abatement procedures on the reverse. Ms. Ford stated an avigation easement protected everyone - pilots, homeowners, the county, the city and the developer - from future legal action arising from complaints regarding airplane noise. Ms. Ford stated that although the owner of the airport, the County, benefits from the business generated by the airport, the entire community benefits as well. City Attorney Schricker stated: an avigation easement is an acquisition of a legal interest in real property and a grant of real property is compensable; there must be a nexus between the goal sought and the requirement used to get ¡ there; standards and criteria must apply equally to all affected parties (should pilots be beneficiaries rather than other segments of the Public?); if easement granted, who pays for it and who is beneficiary; how would terms and conditions of such an easement be established; when County acts as owner of the airport, it is acting in a proprietary capacity as a business owner, I not in its governmental capacity; and the issue of airplane noise is one of i notification. Mr. Schricker advised there are other ways to meet the goal of adequate notification, such as recording on the deed of trust or some sort of memo of notification, that would not require a grant of real property. , -~ I Regular Meeting Minutes 1 June 22, 1993 : MINUTE BOOK NO. 51 Page 6 ¡ Page No. 444 , I I '-.- ---,,--- ----.-;---..--...----. --, ------_.__._-~- - ,.-.. .-. -'--~" '--- -.------.'