Laserfiche WebLink
banks and soils. He stated that it is about time that somebody looks into <br />maintaining the banks. <br />Darryl Coe stated that the report was good; he is the first owner /occupant since <br />1975 and owns the house with all the boats. He has held international sailing <br />competitions in his backyard with people coming from other airlines all over the <br />world. He stated that his dock is in the Level 3 category but that he questions that <br />because he is working on it. He is wondering if the boat that picks up the grass has <br />hit his dock as he knows of two cases of docks being hit. He further stated that <br />there are some dock failures not being addressed that are Redwood City parks <br />such as at Dolphin Park and the park adjacent to the bridge. He asked for a bridge <br />on Shell Boulevard and not cutting the lagoons in two as it impacts sailing. <br />Carole Wong, speaking as a waterfront owner, not an original owner, has a Level <br />1, non - conforming planter box header board. She commended the staff stating <br />that what is taking shape now, she can see where owners have had input, taking <br />shape and having a result at the end. She strongly supports the policy as proposed <br />and the enforcement of Level 3 versus Level 1. The hold harmless is no longer <br />part of package but she does not understand the specifics about the <br />encroachment permit. She stated that remediation of even Level 1's could be <br />encouraged to bring back into compliance by waiving permit fees. <br />Pete Hughes, stating he has a Level 1, does not have a boat dock but when <br />seeking grandfathering, asked if he should put in an imaginary boat dock in the <br />plans or building a boat dock right away. <br />Lyon explained the easement question, the public hearing will address the fees <br />issue, and stated that the intent of the policy going forward is to establish the <br />process, document and record the existing condition for grandfathering, with a <br />different process for future development <br />Note: A "Petition Addendum" was submitted requesting that said petitioners be <br />excluded from any "Hold Harmless" clause that may be incorporated into any new <br />Lagoon Guidelines. (A previous petition was submitted to the Planning <br />Commission.) <br />Council comments included that continuing communication would be important <br />throughout this process. <br />Recommendation: <br />Staff requests that the City Council review and comment on the Redwood Shores <br />Lagoon Bank Policy & Construction Guidelines ( "policy ") as recommended by the <br />Planning Commission at their June 21, 2005 and September 20, 2005 meetings. <br />Furthermore, staff requests consideration of the removal and /or modification of <br />existing improvements that have been classified with "Level 3" significance and <br />recommends that those properties that have been identified with "Level 1" <br />REGULAR CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING MINUTES <br />FEBRUARY 13, 2006 <br />PAGE 6 <br />MINUTE ORDER BOOK NO. 61 <br />Page No. 107 <br />