Laserfiche WebLink
7.1.A. - Page 10 <br />they stayed within the addendum. However, if there were changes it could take another <br />30 to 45 days. <br />Mayor Aguirre asked how the project changed. Mr. Ekern responded that the outer <br />marina proposal went from private to commercial and parking was added, and the small <br />lease area was reconfigured to accommodate the hand launch boat ramp. <br />Council asked what timeframe was if the Council approved the recommendation tonight <br />and State Lands Commission were contacted tomorrow, when this would go back to the <br />Planning Commission. Mr. Ekern said that it depended on the comprehensiveness of <br />the State lands Commission. He said that staff will go as fast as they can to address <br />the issues raised by State Lands, and it may take several months just because of <br />scheduling. <br />Another Council Member said this would assume that the issues with the State Lands <br />Commission will be resolved and then there would be some closure. Mr. Ekern said <br />that Commission were waiting for and relying on the City's EIR. To accommodate them, <br />Mr. Ekern said that he wanted to close environmental loops and provide a clear <br />understanding of the EIR. The same Council Member asked what the difference was <br />between public marinas versus a commercial marina. Mr. Ekern replied that this was <br />not clear yet and wanted to know more of what the expectations were from State Lands <br />Commission. It was also mentioned the issue of multiple instances of overlapping <br />jurisdictions, and suggested a policy that whenever there are multiple agencies, staff, <br />developers and everyone involved needs to find out what their roles are. Furthermore, <br />she raised the possibilities of Redwood City having green marinas or floating home <br />communities. She then concluded that she was leaning towards approving the staff's <br />recommendation. <br />Council discussed the history of the 2003 election and the defeat of the Peninsula Park <br />and Uccelli projects. One Council Member wanted to know how much and what <br />interaction happened between the State Lands Commission, developer, and the City <br />between that time and now. She opined that nothing changed between the large and <br />small lease, and the leases would have been transferred at that time. Furthermore, she <br />stated that the project had fit all existing zoning, which is what the voters wanted in <br />2004. <br />Mr. Lyon responded that the project the State Lands Commission questioned in January <br />2013 has to do with the reconfiguration of the marinas, both inner and mainly outer <br />marinas. According to Mr. Lyon, they wanted to know specific changes, so staff wants to <br />address everything in one motion instead of going back and forth with the commission. <br />One Council Member recommended a basic checklist to address some of the issues <br />that have been brought up. City Attorney Thompson raised the matter that the State <br />Lands issue was not the only issue raised with this project. She pointed out the <br />changes to the hand boat launch not being part of project before and the outer marina. <br />She further stated that the land use issues have not been evaluated and the developer <br />has to address specifics. Director Ekern said that the checklist the Council Member <br />advised was already included in the application process and they rely on the public for <br />CITY COUNCIL May 6, 2013 <br />MEETING MINUTES PAGE 9 <br />