Laserfiche WebLink
<br />78 <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />Section IV <br /> <br />1. The initiative states that the two-thirds vote requirement would not apply to <br />any project where the owner has obtained "a vested right pursuant to State <br />law." What is the scope of the exemption and does it apply to the developer <br />of The Preserve at Redwood Shores? <br /> <br />Under the doctrine of Uvested rights". a property owner acquires a vested right to <br />complete construction of a project in accordance with the terms of a permit if the owner <br />has performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance <br />upon a permit issued by the government. Importantly, zoning, general, or specific plan <br />designations do not create vested rights. <br /> <br />With respect to the Preserve at Redwood Shores, the developer has received <br />approval of a Planned Community Zoning District, an accompanying Precise Plan for the <br />entire site, and a General Plan designation of "Open Space" for the wetland portion of the <br />project. The developer is still required to obtain a planned community permit from the City <br />as well as additional permits from regional permitting agencies. The developer has <br />recently submitted an application for the planned community permit but the Planning <br />Department has not yet issued the permit. Thus, the developer does not have any vested <br />rights at this time. <br /> <br />2. The Port. Would two..thirds voter approval be required if the Port decided to <br />construct a ferry terminal on its land? <br /> <br />No, assuming a ferry terminal would be built on Port land, a terminal would not <br />require two-thirds voter approval. Port land has a General Plan designation of "Industrial" <br />and is zoned "General Industrial", both of which are not covered by the initiative. In <br />addition, to the extent a ferry terminal would extend into the San Francisco Bay waters, <br />those lands are governed by state law and would not be subject to the initiative. <br /> <br />3. County Jail. Would the initiative apply to any new jail facilities built by the <br />County on County-owned land within the City? <br /> <br />No, county-owned facilities are not covered by the initiative. <br /> <br />4. Other County Land. How would the initiative affect joint partnerships between <br />the City and the County or State, such as the Courthouse Square? For <br />example, would two-thirds voter approval be required if the City wanted to <br />expand programming or the uses of Courthouse Square? <br /> <br />No, county-owned land is not covered by the initiative. In addition, the Courthouse <br />Square area does not have land-use designations that are covered by the initiative. <br /> <br />5. Canada College. Would the initiative apply to changes being contemplated for <br />the Canada COllege campus? <br /> <br />No, the initiative would not apply to changes to the Canada College campus. The <br />portion of the Canada College campus that is currently within the City of Redwood City has <br /> <br />6 <br />