Laserfiche WebLink
171 <br /> Leslie W . Hodges , 502 Marlin Drive , opposing the <br /> proposed Planned Development Permit . <br /> Presentation by Redwood Shores Homeowners Association, <br /> covering a variety of information collected, requesting <br /> Council to deny the Stanley Swartz application . <br /> Architectural drawings entitled " Dolphin II " presented <br /> by R . M . Thomas & Associates , A . I .A . <br /> Stanley Swartz Co . , collection of photographs depicting <br /> proposed dwellings . <br /> Stanley C . Swartz Co . , background information and <br /> summary to justify their revised planned development <br /> application . <br /> Stanley C . Swartz Company request dated May 21 , 1971 , <br /> for postponement of their hearing to June 7 , 1971 . <br /> ( granted ) <br /> Petition containing signatures of 76 residents of <br /> Redwood Shores area favoring construction of townhouses <br /> as presented in order to lower their assessments . <br /> Communication submitted at meeting , prior to opening <br /> the public hearing , from R . E . Norris , President , <br /> Redwood Shores homeowners Association, indicating <br /> support of the application for "patio homes " , subject <br /> to six conditions . <br /> Mayor Bury invited a representative of the applicant , Stanley C . Swartz Co . , <br /> to address Council . <br /> Mr . Reid Gustafson, Director of Development , Stanley C . <br /> Swartz Company, indicated for clarification that <br /> photographs submitted earlier were not actually those <br /> of what would be built , but were of a lice project , <br /> similar in appearance but more expensive , developed in <br /> Southern California . The lot width was the same . He <br /> described discussions held with Directors of the <br /> Homeowners Association to attempt to arrive at a solution <br /> agreeable to both parties . Principally, the application <br /> was a change from original concept of townhouses to patio <br /> houses , which it was felt would be more conducive to <br /> stimulating sales . <br /> He indicated one concern of the Homeowners was the <br /> appearance of the rear lot ( on the waterway ) might be <br /> detrimental to the location . After discussions with <br /> the Homeowners , additions to the original plan were <br /> proposed, such as boat docks on each lot for better <br /> uniformity, installation of 23-foot Monterey Pines on <br /> every other lot in the rear, consideration of rear <br /> elevations , and redesign of facing of the units . He <br /> felt they had reached a satisfactory compromise . <br /> Mr . Bob Norris , 470 Capstan Drive , reviewed the earlier <br /> position of the Homeowners and other residents relative <br /> to the application, which had been in opposition, and <br /> subsequent efforts to negotiate some of the concerns . <br /> After some discussion and an opportunity to view similar <br /> development in Southern California, the Homeowners now <br /> favored the patio homes , and wished to withdraw informa- <br /> tion packets first submitted . He asked that their letter <br /> be entered into the Minutes , being the official position <br /> of the Homeowners ' Association, and read it in full . ( For <br /> text , see City Clerk ' s file - Planned Developments . ) He <br /> indicated that the Swartz Co . and Leslie Properties had <br /> been furnished copies . In response to question by Council, <br /> he advised that their petition had been circulated through- <br /> out Redwood Shores , and was not representative of only <br /> the Homeownerst Association . <br /> Mr . William Littell , 475 Starboard Drive , indicated he <br /> spoke for a number of those who were opposed to the <br /> patio house concept , because it did not conform to the <br /> master plan . He felt the site was choice property and <br /> that the proposed type of development would be better <br /> suited to Unit 3 . <br />