CC Min 1996-01-29 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

I I I I . -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PUBLIC HEARING - Council to consider the application of Pacific Shores Limited Partnership to prezone 116 acres at 1000 Seaport Boulevard ITom "M-2" (Heavy Industrial) District (unincorporated San Mateo County), including 106.5 acres to "IP" (Industrial Park District (Redwood City), and 9.5 acres to "GI" (General Industrial) District (Redwood City) (100) Affidavits of mailing and publishing are on file in the City Clerk Department. 1. Staff report; Reports: Planning Commission Recommendation, January 29, 1996, and attachments; Planning Director Executive Summary, January 29,1996; Pacific Shores EIR and Staff Report and Testimony ITom Planning Commission. Planning Director Patterson advised that the issue before the Council was a land use issue and not consideration of a specific development plan for 1000 Seaport Boulevard. He described the sequence of events if the Council approves prezoning '-- including annexation and the development agreement. Director Patterson reviewed the previous three development attempts for this property. Director Patterson advised there had been conflicting testimony during the Planning Commission's public hearings. The heavy industrial tenants believe the proposed project is incompatible with their operations and fear they would eventually be forced out by new light industrial tenants complaining of the noise, dust and odor ITom their operations. Pacific Shores developers believe a 100-acre modern office park is good for Redwood City, and believe they could mitigate all the concerns of the current heavy industrial tenants. The planning Commission approved recommendation by a 4- 3 vote. Director Patterson advised Council that staff believed it was premature to approve prezoning of this land as there was no plan or financing mechanism in place to deal with traffic and compatibility solutions, there was no clear indication as to how the Seaport Boulevard area was to develop in the future, rezoning would be contrary to the General Plan, and there was a need to consider the entire Port area and appropriate land use before taking action on a portion of the area. Director Patterson stated that it was up to the Council to decide what was best for Redwood City in the long term, heavy industrial or light industrial, in the Seaport area. '--- MINUTE BOOK NO. 54 Special Meeting Minutes Page No. 039 January 29, 1996 Page 3