CC Min 1997-11-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

something can be done to stop this development. I think the presentation of the Plan was beautiful. That's not the issue. The issue is the four-story building, the issue is the traffic, the adversarial influence that the gentleman just mentioned, as well as the potentially harmful impact to the children in the school environment. I really do think it would behoove this Council to take a serious consideration to looking at a Master Plan for all of Redwood Shores and representing us accordingly." George Duebner described and displayed a petition with 250-300 signatures of residents of Redwood Shores opposing the Lido Office Building. (At this time the lights in the Chamber went out as they were scheduled to do, but were quickly restored.) Manuel Sotomayor, said rnore attention needed to be paid to the children and pedestrians, and suggested that stop signs be erected at Marlin and Cringle. Mayor Howard asked if anyone else wished to speak to this issue. No one spoke or came forward. Couneilman Claire said, "the comments by Mr. Russell, attorney for the developer, for me at least, do hold a great deal of truth, in the process and the state law and how it is read. For us to, at this point, do anything with this Project, we would have to find something that was detrirnental to the health and welfare of the community.... My questions is, about the architectural permits, etc. that have been given so far, and whether or not there is anything the City Council in your opinion needs to do at this point in time to require some mitigations to those architectural permit?" City Attorney Sehrieker said, "Mr. Russell's comments were directed to the rights which are vested under the Tentative Vesting Map Act, and I concur with his interpretation ofthe Act. And what he focused on was whether or not there was sufficient Findings to determine that the proposal created a condition that would be dangerous to health, safety and welfare. I also concur. I do not believe that you have any facts before you which would allow you to overrule, or find the Vesting Tentative Map, on that basis, to be invalid. Your questions was in respect to the Architectural Permit. The reason I mentioned the Vesting Tentative Map is because if indeed the rights are vested, the Architectural Permit right is also an entitlement which has vested, as a consequence of the Map. The laws that are in effect at the time the Map is approved is the law which governs the rights of the property owner, under the Map. Aside from that, the Architectural Permit process has proceeded to the point of completion. The appeal period has passed. The City Council has no jurisdiction to reach down and review independently the Architectural Permit on its own. That's my answer to your specific question." Councilman Claire said he was very disturbed to hear that the CC&Rs were removed from the property, and that the Owners Association did not take part in the process of reviewing the architectural design process. He said if that had taken place the current REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 NOVEMBER 17,1997 MINUTES Page No. 062 PAGE 31