CC Min 1998-06-08 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

had plans for improvements but had to wait until the Highway 101 improvements were completed. Mrs. Parcell responded to several blighted conditions cited in the Report and explained they did not apply to her property. She said the conditions cited are problems of code enforcement and supply and demand in Area I, and not redevelopment issues. She said, "One of the reason assessed valuations have not gone up dramatically is because many of the properties have not changed hands often or recently." Mrs. Parcell said when service companies are forced out of the City, jobs can be lost and prices might have to rise. She said there is not a comparable site in the City to relocate her business, which needs a large space for trucks and freeway access. Mrs. Parcell said the underground tank on her property is legal and services 50 trucks. She said everyone will end up paying more if the City eliminates industrial companies. She said, "If the 4th Amendment is adopted, the value of their properties would no longer be governed by the market place and free enterprise, because all of the properties are along the 101 corridor, and if we want to sell a property the value would be questionable, since the proposed buyers would know that they could be redeveloped, also." Director Church said, "I want to remind the Council/Agency that simply by establishing a Redevelopment District, you are not necessarily implying that you are going to act in that area right away." He said there are properties established in 1982 that have not changed. Director Church said the Council could decide to act and the property owners would be invited to participate, or developers can come to the Council/Agency with a proposal, such as Sequoia Station. Director Church said there was no evidence that establishing a Redevelopment District has created a problem either buying or selling properties in the Area over the sixteen years of the Redevelopment Agency. Mayor/Chairperson Howard asked that errors in the Report be corrected. Director Church said the properties, although incorrectly identified, were in the proposed amended area. MEMO 6/10/98 Deborah Livornese, from the law firm Wendell, Rose and Black and Dean, IIII Broadway, Oakland, speaking on behalf of Malibu Grand Prix, said the business occupied approximately 14 acres in Area 2. She said it had been there almost 20 years and is a thriving success attracting approximately I million visitors per year to Redwood City. Ms. Livomese said Malibu Grand Prix is an active contributor to the community. She said Malibu Grand Prix had been in discussions with City staff for the last 18 months relating to improved upgrades, but had not learned of this proposed amendment until last week, and did not receive a mailed notice. Ms. Livornese said she received materials relating to the amendment last Friday and had not had time to fully consider them, and the notice given was not adequate. Ms. Livomese said she had also submitted written comments. She said Area 2 was home to many thriving MINUTE BOOK NO.,¡, AGENDA FOR THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 8, 1998 AND CONCURRENT MEETING WITH THE Page No. 546 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL