Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> . . . . . - <br /> Seaport Industrial Business Association, Clem Molony, June 5, 1998; <br /> Wendall, Rose, Black and Dean, Malibu Grand Prix, DeboraiI Livornese, June 8, 1998; <br /> Hannig Law Firm, Ted Hannig, June 8, 1998; <br /> - <br /> Lyngso Garden Materials, Theresa Lyngso, June 8, 1998 <br /> Lyngso Garden Materials, Victor Thomas, June 9, 1998 <br /> FP International, Arthur Graham <br /> Director Church said that written responses to all written comments received will be <br /> made at the Concurrent Council/Redevelopment Agency Board Meeting of January 22, <br /> 1998. He added that staff would try to respond to questions raised during the public <br /> statement period after the public statement period was concluded. <br /> MEMO 6/10/98 <br /> In response to Council Member Bain's questions, Director Church described the <br /> status of talks with the County regarding the conditions of County property just south <br /> of the Redwood City border along EI Camino Real, and said although County staffwas <br /> not involved in any plans for the area, perhaps Council Members could work with their <br /> peers on the Board of Supervisors to discuss positive changes. <br /> 4. Receive public statements, questions and comments; <br /> Mayor/Chairperson Howard called upon those speakers who wished to comment at <br /> - this time. She advised that any speaker would have the opportunity to question staff or <br /> the consultants through the Mayor/Chairperson. She asked everyone to please try to <br /> abide by the established three-minute time limit, and said those speaking for several <br /> people could take longer. <br /> In response to Council Member/Director Leipzig's questions, Redevelopment <br /> Agency Counsel Kessler stipulated that speakers did not have to declare if they were <br /> tenants or owners, the property address would suffice. <br /> MEMO 6/10/98 <br /> Alice Parcell, owner and operator of the property at 1590 Tacoma Way, speaking for <br /> her parents, her brother and her husband, Frank Parcell, said she opposed the proposed <br /> 4th Amendment based on issues of code enforcement and supply and demand, not the <br /> issue of redevelopment. She said she was speaking as a property owner of 6 parcels, <br /> business owner, employer, landlord and tenant all in Area 1. Mrs. Parcell said her <br /> business was not blighted, and pointed out several errors in the Report. She described <br /> the outstanding services her employees have provided since 1952, many of them <br /> Redwood City residents and long, long time employees. She expressed doubt they <br /> would be allowed to continue to work in Redwood City if the 4th Amendment passes. <br /> Mrs. Parcell said it appeared to her that the City/Agency wanted her property to <br /> relocate auto dealerships to bring in higher tax sales revenue. She said her company <br /> - AGENDA FOR THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING MINUTE BOOK NO. ¡f' JUNE 8,1998 <br /> AND CONCURRENT MEETING WITH THE Page No. 545 PAGE 7 <br /> CITY COUNCIL <br />