AgdaPkt 2002-09-09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

of 2 P&R-Tom Passanisi . C!TYOFREDWOODC!TY __ From: swaner@postoffice.pacbell.net CITY CLERK Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 10:17 AM To: tpassanisi@redwoodcity.org Cc: dvalkenaar@bcglobaLnet Subject: RWS Bayfront Specific Plan Tom: I am in complete accord with David Valkenaar's attached e-mail to you. There is absolutely no public parking out here, whether it be on "public" streets or our many. many private streets. As you know. all during those months of sessions deciding on what would be acceptable on that spot - a church - particularly one of the size FACC is contemplating - was not one of our choices. Thanks to Dick Claire FACC got their foot in the door. If you were to take a survey today of all of us who participated in those work sessions, no one would be in favor of a church of that size. If you will remember, early on in that first Tuesday afternoon 'hearing' I voiced concerns over the 'testimony' of Ron because he kept saying "At this ti.me" ... never did he or Scott say What they were planning down the road, and I then and continually have said they need to build their facility out between Twin Dolphin Drive and Shoreline Drive. There is more than sufficient room for their church AND all the parking they will need. Redwood City has laws on parking for all businesses on the west side and those same niles must be applied on the east side....whether it be a church or not! Most of us are not against the church, per se, but without sufficient on-site parking they are intruding on resident space and our quality of life. Without specific on-site parking for the their full compliment of 600 church members - most coming from outside of Redwood Shores - this project MUST NOT BE APPROVED. Scott Owens made the statement that "when the parking at either The Pointe or SBSA is gone, he will leave" at a Planning Commission meeting, which is when Ralph Garcia said if Scott really meant that, he would change his vote to approve. Scott Owens is now in complete denial of ever saying that, yet there are a lot of us that were present that heard him, and I for one, will hold him to that. Then what will become of such a monster building that never should have been built there in the first place? Pat Dixon 16 Admiralty Place 591-5455 dvalkenaar@sbcglobal.net wrote: I am in support of the general concepts behind the Redwood Shores Bayfmnt Specific Plan, but I have some major concerns with how the details are sorting out. First, t believe that, Technically, the Environmental Impact Report for the Redwood Shores Specific Plan is deficient in two ways. It cloes not either list or respond to all of the 9"3/2002