AgdaPkt 2008-08-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Stephanie Munoz, stated that while she is not a resident she is a neighbor and she opined that the measure will pass because of the "open space" concept. She suggested a compromise which included taking mitigating steps on the development of this property. She would like the Council to look at clustered housing and she believes the Council could craft an ordinance to go on the ballot that will make it possible to include some housing. Claire Felong said that she supports open space she has concerns about water for the development that would be in that area. She spoke about marsh lands absorbing carbons. Ms. Felong explained that the Saltworks discussion seemed like it was led by the City and she believes this is how the initiative came to pass. Ms. Felong would have liked the City to take a stand and show its position. Council discussion Comments were made about the value of the public input provided tonight and how helpful this is when it comes across with civility and professionalism. Council asked questions about the implications of the proposed initiative on city parks such as Red Morton, adjacent jurisdictions, the Fire Station and possibly the Canada College project. Certain Council Members opined that the 1/3 veto would apply to all park lands in Redwood City and that is unrelated to Cargill lands. Council also asked if a two-thirds vote would be needed to build a senior center as well as to place a fire station or relocate a park. City Attorney Yamamoto confirmed that the terminology makes it difficult to answer question without further study and analysis. Mr. Yamamoto said that other jurisdictions will not be governed by this Charter Amendment. Comments were made about the language of the initiative being conducive to many interpretations and legal challenges. Council voiced an interest in continuing a dialogue that is honest and transparent. There was an interest in being proactive and seeking answers that clarify the content of the initiative and how it would apply to new land as well as the County-owned lands. The Council discussed opportunities for land swaps and how this initiative might impact them. One property mentioned was the Jardin de Ninos Park. Council also asked questions about new properties being impacted as well as land-swaps for donated properties. The possibility that one property is guiding this effort was discussed and certain Council Members voiced their concerns that this would impose a 1/3 veto right on any development in certain zoning classifications. They asked if the two-thirds voter approval would be needed for the City to acquired land that is currently zoned "industrial" or "residential" for building new park or teen centers. Annexation of new properties were discussed as well as Area H. The preserve at Redwood Shores was discussed. Council asked if a two-thirds vote would be needed to change its current plans. Mr. Yamamoto provided some clarifying information about certain projects such as the Canada College development. One Council Member clarified that staff will come back with answers to the specific questions but that the discussion is positive and shows an interest in collaboration. Questions were posed on how this will impact the City's General Plan process and Mr. Yamamoto replied that legal staff and planning Department staff are working diligently on understanding the repercussions for that process. Other Council Members asked that possible implications for the Port of Redwood City, marinas at JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEETING MINUTES APRIL 14, 2008 PAGE 7