CC Min 1998-03-02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

area. In answer to Mayor Howard's questions, Senior Planner Passanisi said the changes would not affect "public access, pedestrian pathways or open space" and the public would still have access through the Shores Business Center Association easements. 2. Open public hearing; Mayor Howard opened the public hearing at 8:40 p.m. 3. Hear public comment; Michael Gibson, representing the Shores Business Center Association, said the proposed amendment regarding the removal of Parcel B did not directly impact the Association, but he saw no downside to the public or the Association if it was approved. He said the Shores Business Center Association did have a direct interest in the second proposed amendment as the Association is "interested in having the obligations of the Electronics Arts Development Agreement removed from properties that we currently own." Mr. Gibson explained that some of their property was inadvertently included in the Electronic Arts Final Map, and the Association "is interested in having the title to those properties, to whatever extent this Development Agreement is a cloud on that title, removed, and we would hope that the City would be interested in making sure that all of the Flatirons lands were covered. They are not currently covered right now... It is really a housekeeping item at this point." Michael Wilmar, representing Flatirons Funding, said he agreed with Mr. Gibson that the second proposed amendment was just a technical change. He said this subject had been before the Planning Commission three times and a concern had been raised about the land use on Parcel B. Mr. Wilmar said the condition imposed by the Planning Commission for Shorebreeze to support the traffic assessment district was at first confusing and that was the genesis of the appeals. He said that confusion had been eliminated, "and the appeals had been withdrawn and now what you have before you is what I consider another technical change, just removing Parcel B from the encumbrance of the Development Agreement, because Shorebreeze is not subject to that agreement. . .. There is no change in the City's ability to enforce the Planned Development Permit or the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement." Colleen Jordan, 84 Eddystone Court, said she had been asked by members of the Board of the Redwood Shores Home Owners Association to ask the Council to delay action on this item to the March 16 Council meeting, so they would have an opportunity to review this issue. She said this was the first time these proposed amendments had been brought to the attention of the Association's leadership, and they wanted to call a special Board meeting to address the matter. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 MARCH 2,1998 MINUTES Page No. 306 PAGE 12