My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
RDA Min 2001-01-29 Jnt
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
Redevelopment
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
RDA Min 2001-01-29 Jnt
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2005 2:40:57 PM
Creation date
3/29/2004 9:41:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
Redevelopment
Date
1/29/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
<br /> II " <br /> CINEMA-OFFICE AND PARKING PROJECT AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS <br /> REQUIRED UNDER CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT LAW; <br />- The motion passed by a majority roll call vote, with Council Member Jordan voting <br /> no; Council Member Ira absent. <br /> Council Member Hartnett stated he was not satisfied with the DDA as currently written. <br /> He requested amendments as provided to the City Clerk and specified in the motion below. <br /> Vice Mayor Claire stated he will vote in favor because it is a good project for the City, <br /> more residential is needed but the project will bring traffic to downtown at needed times. <br /> Council Member Hartnett stated the DDA as presented did not adequately address a <br /> number ofthe public concerns with the project. Some ofthe amendments pertain to design, <br /> which gives the City more flexibility in terms of design review to make clear that the <br /> project guidelines submitted are "guidelines". The review of the actual architectural plans <br /> submitted will proceed in a way that provides flexibility for both the Architectural Review <br /> Committee and the Council to vary from the specifics of the project guidelines in order to <br /> obtain an appropriate quality. Concerns regarding the maintenance of the inside of the <br /> premises are also addressed in the amendments. The concerns of traffic and parking are <br /> addressed by clearly delineating management plans that are legally enforceable. The final <br /> subject of the amendments is regarding use permits where the City holds a fair amount of <br /> discretion with respect to the conditions the City requires for the applicant to obtain a use <br /> permit. There will be many issues addressed in this regard including security, public safety, <br />- and garbage disposal to provide better rights of enforcement. <br /> Council Member Hartnett continued with the merits of the project with appreciation ofMr. <br /> Bygdnes' and others' presentations and communications ftom concerned citizens in <br /> evaluating the concept and details of the project. Economically, the project involves <br /> transferring land in the approximately value of $4.4M in return for $20M. The $20M will <br /> provide a public parking structure and will allow a retail/cinema development to go <br /> forward downtown. The last public parking structure for the benefit of all of downtown is <br /> one that the City is paying for, not a developer, and is a public parking structure to serve <br /> anybody wanting to use it. This parking structure would also be a public parking structure <br /> to serve anybody wanting to use it and it is integral not just for the retail/cinema project, <br /> but to support the entirety of downtown. He stated, he thinks the City should move <br /> forward, not just for revitalizing downtown, but because it fits within a vision for the entire <br /> City - a place of opportunity and choices. <br /> Council Member Pierce stated that the DDA sets out the guidelines between the City and <br /> the developer and that this project involves one block in the downtown, not the entire <br /> downtown area. She further stated that there are still approval processes involving permits, <br /> the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission still have purview over <br />- REGULAR COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT MEETINGS JANUARY 29, 2001 <br /> MINUTES PAGE 9 <br /> MINUTES Book No.58 <br /> Page NO. 338 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.