My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2010-10-11
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
AgdaPkt 2010-10-11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2015 1:07:15 PM
Creation date
10/7/2010 3:42:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
10/11/2010
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
245
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
7.A <br /> Page 69 <br /> • before the Planning Commission. She spoke to the pedestrian-enhanced design of the <br /> streets in the General Plan. She gave some additional information on the pedestrian- <br /> enhanced street portions of the General Plan. She clarified the information given in <br /> Alternative 3 regarding the Abernathy parcel. <br /> Kathleen McLaughlin, Redwood City resident noted her concerns over the bike lanes in <br /> the downtown area. She felt the downtown area was too busy for bike lanes which <br /> shared traffic lanes. She noted, in looking at the plan, that there did not seem to be a <br /> designated area for the transit area downtown. She suggested also the consideration of <br /> a bike and pedestrian lane along the Caltrans route. She expressed concerns over the <br /> status of Farmhill also when it came to pedestrian-enhanced traffic areas. She felt bike <br /> lanes were needed there as well. <br /> Karen Keefer, Redwood City resident noted she worked for FEMA and addressed a <br /> number of concerns. She addressed ABAG (Association of Bay Area Government) and <br /> the housing situation and whether this takes into consideration job loss in the area and <br /> housing price reductions. She spoke to the less than significant mitigation measures, <br /> more specifically geology and soils along Redwood Shores. <br /> Diana Reddy, HLC (Housing Leadership Council) spoke as an advocate for affordable <br /> housing. She congratulated Staff on the General Plan and particularly the housing <br /> element. She noted she and the HLC stood ready to support the Council and the City in <br /> the projects they looked forward to developing in the future. <br /> James Jonas, Redwood City resident thanks Staff and consultants for their hard work <br /> 0 and persistence, as well as the Planning Commission. He spoke to the language of <br /> houseboat marinas versus floating communities. He spoke as well to comment 53.6 <br /> which stated he had not provided evidence, to which he disagreed since he had <br /> provided information referenced from a document which came from BCDC (San <br /> Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission). He read from a document <br /> and also provided a copy to the Commission. <br /> Dan Ponti, Redwood City resident also thanked everyone for their work on the New <br /> Y rY <br /> General Plan. He spoke with regard to two issues, the seaport extension of the streetcar <br /> line, as well as the consideration of alternatives. <br /> Cynthia Denney, Sierra Club Wetlands, thanked Staff for adding the definition of smart <br /> growth to the General Plan. She wished to make sure that the final EIR specify the <br /> criteria of smart growth is based on existing developed land. She asked for clarification <br /> of what the existing definition was in the General Plan for in-fill. <br /> MIS Borgens and Schmidt to close the public hearing. <br /> Break ... <br /> Various Staff answered the questions and concerns as they arose in public comment, in <br /> the order they were received. <br /> Ms. Brownfield addressed the question regarding the Class 3 bike lanes in the <br /> III downtown area. She noted the Complete Streets Committee vetted the bike plan within <br /> the General Plan. That organization and group would like to see separated bike lanes <br /> Page 10 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.