AgdaPkt 2013-01-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 17 to Table of Mixed Use Opportunity Sites, at p. H-119 of the General Plan and at p. B-1- 12 of Appendix B to General Plan.) The purpose was not to establish City policy regarding whether the property owner could apply to develop a project that would propose 400-plus new units, without live-aboard opportunities. In fact, the Housing Element explains that the City was aware of private interest in development of this site with 412 new units, without a condition regarding retention of live-aboards. (General Plan, Appendix B, pp. B-1-15-16.) Appellant also asserts that "all published plans and references ... in the General Plan documents assume or reference keeping live-aboards at Pete's Harbor." (Appeal, p. 8, citing p. H-178 (program H-23) of the Housing Element of the General Plan.) However, the Mixed Use-Waterfront land use category is available for a broad range of housing options, from new construction to live-aboards, without favoring one type of housing over the other. For example: • "Housing options can include structured housing, floating homes, houseboats, and live-aboard boats." (General Plan, p. H-65.) • "The Mixed Use-Waterfront Neighborhood designation is intended to foster unique neighborhoods that take advantage of Redwood City's bayfront. A mix of uses is allowed within this designation, including housing (up to 40 units per acre) and supporting commercial businesses, hospitality and restaurant uses that attract visitors, marinas, and businesses that support marina functions. Housing options can also include floating homes, houseboats, and live-aboard boats. Public access and open space amenities are required along the waterfront, and internal pedestrian circulation of the neighborhoods should link to waterfront amenities." (General Plan, p. H-118.) This is part of the City's multi-pronged approach to the development and retention of alternative housing models. Indeed, no policy requires the City to deny a Project if the property owner and Applicant have elected to develop a residential project that does not incorporate live-aboard housing. Rather, while the General Plan encourages City staff to consult "stakeholders regarding existing floating communities in Redwood City [and to] [e]stablish a set of floating community best practices to ensure the viability of this innovative housing type" (General Plan, p. H-178)—which staff will be doing in connection with the preparation of mixed use waterfront implementing zoning—this is not a basis to deny a project. Page 17 of 27