CC Min 1997-11-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

the Architectural Permit, a four-story, 115,000 square foot office building. She said the Association supported the compromise position, two, two-story buildings designed in keeping with the residential neighborhood. Ms. Parden said the Articles of Incorporation and the by-laws of the Association "require that we pursue anything that affects the welfare of its members. This Project does." Ms. Parden described the lack of notification to the residents by the City regarding this Project, including the deannexation of this property. She said that RSOA was advised by Max Keech and Don Warren of Stonybrook Associates that the deannexation which removed the CC&Rs occurred when the property was sold in 1996. She said RSOA "was never consulted on this Project before the Architectural Advisory Committee approved this Project.... The November 17 staff report you have before you is patently incorrect in the assumption that any representative of the RSOA was notified by the applicant." Ms. Parden said the RSOA and the Shores Business Association have managed the growth of Redwood Shores through its own architectural review process. She said this Project "slipped through the cracks... due to its removal from the RSOA in combination with the advisory nature of the City's Architectural Committee" She said the "architectural character of the Project is not in keeping in the residential area that surrounds the site. Two, two-story buildings could have the architectural look to blend into the neighborhood as evidenced in the Bridge Park Center. . . A four-story building cannot be made to look or to feel residential." Ms. Parden said RSOA believes that this Project, "pushes the envelope in its definition of low-rise and low-impact." She said the approved Project uses maximum density as its definition. She acknowledged that Max Keech was willing to compromise in other mitigation areas, and asked Council to "please ask the owners to compromise just a little bit more so that this Project will be on that the community welcomes... It is a strong recommendation of the RSOA to restructure the Architectural review process to have a greater degree of notice and public input, especially on larger projects." Ms. Parden said the architectural review process was not public, but advisory to the staff, "and I believe this is the basis of the problem." In response to Couneilman Claire's question regarding the apartment development, Ms. Parden said that project had been brought to the RSOA for its input. Miehael Gibson, 520 Harbor Blvd., Belmont, a consultant to the Redwood Shores Owners Association, and secretary of its New Construction Committee, said the RSOA is focused on the architectural compatibility of the Project, and not the zoning issues. Mr. Gibson said the real issue is "this has not been a reasonable application of the Lido Specific Plan." He said the Plan has control over the "CG" zoning, and if there had been another available zoning that contained all these uses, then "that was in error, because it was presented at the time... that (it) would contain all the uses that were anticipated in the settlement with SBSA." Mr. Gibson said, "The Specific Plan deals with the issue of low-rise. The Architectural Permit deals with the issue of height, architectural massing, neighborhood compatibility, those kinds of things, and that is the arena in which I would like to speak... There was a suggestion that the "CG" zoning was intentionally chosen because it had a 75 foot height limit, or there has been another suggestion that the Uniform Building Code REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 NOVEMBER 17,1997 MINUTES Page No. 048 PAGE 17