|
<br /> - - II .,
<br /> of Redwood Shores, not only as a taxpayer, but I'm here as a parent... My son is three
<br /> years old, and he will be going to that school. Thank you for putting it there, and please
<br /> - do not put another 240 cars an hour past that school. He will be crossing Redwood Shores
<br /> Parkway. We have already had one child die, Jamie died three years ago, and she was
<br /> crossing the street to catch a bus to take her to school, and there was a crossing guard
<br /> there... do not, do not, please, do not... increase the risk at all, for any child to get hurt."
<br /> Ryan Mikolasik, 346 Meridian, directed his questions to Ryland developers about the
<br /> disclosure of the plans to build the Project, and asked "are (you) actively disclosing as
<br /> much as you are actively advertising the site to the new home buyers, that this four-story
<br /> monolith is going to be there." Mr. Mikolasik described how his company handles
<br /> disclosures, and said "if you want to get something passed the public you hold a hearing.
<br /> That is how I feel as a resident of the Shores, that I have been duped, again, by the City
<br /> Council, by this process. Holding meetings at 3 o'clock on a Monday afternoon is a great
<br /> way to get a four-story building approved, but not a way to get all the citizens who are
<br /> impacted by it. You are here tonight as servants of the people. This is my first meeting
<br /> ever, and I am so proud of (Vice Mayor Ruskin) to have had the courage to admit that
<br /> there might have been a mistake... We are all human and we all make mistakes." Mr.
<br /> Mikolasik said, "we have to take responsibility for our actions. The attorney for the
<br /> Developer said that property rights are valid, and I am a believer in property rights, but
<br /> with rights come responsibilities. You have to be responsible to the people you serve as
<br /> government servants, and you have to be responsible to your neighbors."
<br /> - Jeff Sehroeder, Ryland Homes, said, "Typically we disclose all the uses that are know on
<br /> the surrounding property, and I am not sure of the exact disclosure language here, but we
<br /> do disclose the zoning and the Specific Plan designation for the property."
<br /> Gary Clarke, 312 Mindanao Drive, said he agreed with most of the speakers, and he also
<br /> objected to the four-story low-rise building. Mr. Clarke referred to the Traffic Report and
<br /> said he disagreed with the conclusions comparing commercial and residential vehicular
<br /> trips. He said he found it hard to believe that each resident would average 6.6 trips per day
<br /> during the week. Mr. Clarke said he wasn't living in Redwood Shores in 1992, and most
<br /> of the buildings "adjacent to the area on the other side of Redwood Shores Parkway"
<br /> hadn't been built yet. He said the future residents of the new Lido development weren't at
<br /> this meeting to express their concerns, the Council would be voting for them. Mr. Clarke
<br /> said the owners of the property who had expressed support for the Project do not live
<br /> there. He said the developer's attorney mentioned one legal way the Council to deny this
<br /> Project, "if you could declare it a public nuisance. He then turned around and called a
<br /> public nuisance, a public danger. Maybe legal dictionaries are different from the
<br /> dictionaries I use, but nuisance does not equate to danger. Traffic could certainly be
<br /> considered a nuisance... I object to this Project, but if it gets built, I'm not going to move.
<br /> But I guarantee you I'll vote against anyone of you who vote for it."
<br /> Sherman Chan, 116 Monaco Drive, said he had lived in Redwood Shores for about three
<br /> ~ years, and supported the Project. Mr. Chan said, "I base my support on two basic reasons.
<br /> REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 NOVEMBER 17,1997
<br /> MINUTES Page No. 059 PAGE 28
<br />
|