CCMin 2010-03-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

i being revised. Questions were asked about six project applications that were submitted in the recent past. He covered the shadows study, height changes, parcelization, historic designation and other aspects of the Plan. Mr. Zack then went through the various changes to the Plan including height, shadows, and zoning. He focused primarily on Historic Resources and Shadows. Council asked if the property owners are aware of the historic designation and regulations being proposed and Mr. Zack said that this will happen in the near future. Council added that outreach to property owners should be done earlier rather than later. One Council Member added that any person can request that someone else's property be designated as historic. Mr. Zack also explained that under "uses" staff is suggesting an Entertainment District. He then covered next steps and dates for certification and final approval. The issue of Main Street was discussed. One Council Member noted that the prior "use" on Main Street was removed and Mr. Zack said this was at the request by Downtown Business Group. Public Comment Gita Dev, speaking on behalf of Marianna Raymond who could not be present, spoke in favor of the Downtown Precise Plan and congratulated staff. She made some suggestions for clarification, and she wanted certain parts of the Plan strengthened. She suggested some overlays to include pedestrian, complete streets, and the bike master plans to make downtown more transit-oriented. Morton Frank, a Redwood City resident, expressed his feelings about the judge's ruling, the need for progress, and how he considers the judge's ruling a gift. He suggested that Council use this gift to regroup, double-check criteria, and tie the Downtown Precise Plan to economic development. Nick Watry said he was notified that he owns a historic resources building and he is pleased with it. He had two suggestions which were to fold in energy consumption regulations and carbon footprints requirements into the revised Precise Plan. He will send a letter of recommendation to staff with up to date ideas on parking. Council Discussion Council asked about the lower heights and what changed in the Plan. Mr. Zack explained that what changed was the number of parcels and the heights were lowered. One Council Member wanted the historic resources addition strengthened. This Council Member wanted the public to have choices and not have to follow a "cookie cutter" approach. There was a concern that six architectural choices might be limiting, for example where is the colonial style? This Council Member did not want to deprive the public of its creativity. One Council Member wants to invite "forward" and "progressive" thinking. This Council Member wanted to balance historic resources with change and how civic "uses" are applied. Another Council Member agreed with the comments and thanked staff for the hard work. He was very pleased and is anxious to move forward. One Council Member thanked staff for all the work but she commented that she is tired of plans. For her, it is frustrating that this began in 2004 and is not finalized. She made comments about private versus public standards. She added that she expects staff to talk to the property owners so that there are no surprises and people are aware of what is coming. One Council JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MARCH 22, 2010 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 8 MINUTE BOOK NO. 64 Page No. 060