Laserfiche WebLink
<br />;7¿;- / <br /> <br />REP()RT <br /> <br /> <br />To the Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From the City Manager <br /> <br />July 11, 2005 <br /> <br />Subject <br />General Plan - Issues Relating to Undeveloped Bayfront Land Zoned Tidal Plain (TP) <br /> <br />Recommendation <br />This is an informational report <br /> <br />Background <br />At the June 6, 2005 Council meeting, staff was asked to provide information concerning <br />remaining undeveloped lands on the Bayfront. The focus of the Council's interest was on <br />the lands designated as Urban Reserve in the 1990 General Plan. Council also asked for <br />information concerning the land area designated as "Area H" because it is one of the <br />largest areas of undeveloped land in Redwood Shores and is partially designated as Urban <br />Reserve. <br /> <br />This report is intended to provide Council with some of the history surrounding the <br />evolution of the Urban Reserve land use designation, as well as a brief history of Area H; <br />and also to provide some of the procedural choices available to Council, given that the City <br />is already in process of updating the General Plan. <br /> <br />The 1975 General Plan <br />The designation of Urban Reserve has existed in Redwood City's General Plan since at <br />least 1975. The land use plan from the 1975 General Plan is Attachment 3 to this report. <br />In 1975 there were two areas of Urban Reserve, shown in grey on this land use map: <br /> <br />1. Most of the north-eastern-most tip of Redwood Shores, beyond the power lines <br /> <br />2. The area then known as South Shores (generally the area ofthe Bayfront between <br />Steinberger Slough to the northwest and Redwood Creek to the south-east). <br /> <br />There is no explanation of the Urban Reserve definition, either on the land use map or in <br />the body of the 1-975 General Plan. The original designation of Urban Reserve was <br />apparently placed in the General Plan because at the time both the City and. the land <br />owner anticipated continued development of both areas. There was apparently a desire to <br />imply possible future development of these areas without conducting the environmental <br />review that would have been necessary if these areas were given specific land use <br />designations. <br /> <br />1 <br />