AgdaPkt 2011-03-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� � 6.1A Page 18 The following items were pulied from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 6.3C (Ira), 6.1 E and 6.3C (FousUAguirre), 6.1.F, 6.3A, and 6.3E (Foust). M/S Gee/Seybert to approve the Consent Calendar except the pulled items 6.1E, 6.1.F, 6.3A, 6.3C, 6.3E. Motion carried unanimously by electronic vote. Discussion on item 6.1 E Vice Mayor Aguirre supports these efforts but would like to see some hard numbers on the benefits of these partnerships. She would like to get some background as well. Mr. Beth, Director of Parks and Recreation, confirmed that these are available through the John Gardner Center and he will send these to the Counci( the next morning. M/S Gee/Aguirre to approve item 6.1 E. Motion carried unanimously by electronic vote. Council Member Foust explained that she will vote no on 6.3E and 6.1 F because she does not need the due diligence period to know this will not be a viable option especially with the other downtown priorities. She respects her Council colleagues' position but she would prefer that the focus remain in downtown issues. M/S Bain/Seybert to approve agenda item 6.1 F. Motion carried 6-1 by roll call vote with Council Member Foust opposing. Discussion on item 6.3E M/S Gee/Pierce to approve agenda item 6.3E. Council Member Gee clarified that this is , an exploratory step and there is no final commitment to go through the purchase but the goal is to investigate through the due diligence period. Motion carried 6-1 by electronic vote with Council Member Foust opposing. Discussion on item 6.3A Council Member Foust said that she downloaded some maps and these had some important detailed information in the mixed use area and she would like to have more information on this �priority development area" which is not just downtown. Ms. Ekas, Planning Manager, said that a map will be brought back to the Council with more details on the areas east of 101. She explained that a# a recent meeting with ABAG staff explained the different areas and the increased development at Pacific Shores and how Salfinrorks was excluded. M/S Foust/Gee to approve agenda item 6.3A. Mayor Ira said that the City will make its best determination on where development goes and not ABAG. One Council Member added that this is the second time around for the sub RHNA discussion and this is valuable. Another Council noted that there is a lot of talk about the regionalization of services and how land use is a sensitive area of such discussions. She referred to the implementation of SB 375 and AB 32 and how the "big four" being the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, The Bay Conservation and Development Commission, The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and the Association of Bay Governments are making decisions that impact us. She noted that Redwood City needs to be aware and involved. This Council Member also spoke about the Bay Plan and how it will impact fhe regions' economic viability. Motion carried unanimously by electronic vote. JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD March 7, 2011 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 4