May 3, 2008

Whose say anyway?

Open space proposal may halt development

By Shaun Bishop / Daily News Staff Writer

JoAnn McDonnell would like to see a mix of shops and housing built on the parking lot near her floating home on Redwood Creek.

Right now, her shingled, three-story house at Docktown Marina is moored next to a handful of buildings and a paved area used as storage for RVs and discarded junk.

"I'd like to see some decent, responsible development - not high-rises," McDonnell said Friday, standing on her front porch. So long as it wouldn't displace the seafaring residents, "I think Redwood City would be all the better for it," she said.

Not everyone at Docktown agrees, including Richard Aldridge, who doesn't mind the nearby clutter. "I think it's good to have a few funky places left," he said.

If the Open Space Vote initiative gathers enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot, any debate about whether and how Docktown should change could become moot.

The initiative, backed by environmental groups, would change Redwood City's charter to require that two-thirds of voters approve any development on land considered "open space." Because the land around Docktown Marina is zoned tidal plain, which fits the definition of open space, it could fall under the initiative's provisions.

Proponents say they have more than half of the 5,000 necessary signatures to put Open Space Vote on the ballot.

The initiative's primary target is 1,433 acres of land owned by Cargill Salt, which is considering the property east of Highway 101 for a mix of housing, parks, retail shops and restored wetlands. Environmental groups backing Open Space Vote say the whole area should be restored to wetlands.

City council members have expressed concern that the initiative would restrict what the city can do in public open spaces, such as city parks.

According to a preliminary city analysis, at least four other much smaller, private properties could be affected by the initiative's definition of open space, which includes parks, waterways and tidal plains such as Dockown Marina.

A development company working on plans for Docktown, which is east of Highway 101 between Whipple Avenue and Woodside Road, says it doesn't believe the initiative's intention is to block construction there, but that might be the ultimate effect.

"(The initiative) causes issues for any revitalization on that property just because of the practicality of actually getting the required votes," said Aaron Yakligian, a senior project leader for Trumark Companies.

Alluding to the parking lot her home overlooks, McDonnell said, "This isn't what I think of as open space. I think marshland."

David Lewis, executive director of Save the Bay, one of the measure's primary backers, has said the open space left in the Bay Area should be protected. Lewis insists that development currently allowed on land zoned for open space, such as a restroom at a park, would not trigger a vote under the initiative.

Otherwise, "(Developers) should make the case to the public, if it's really going to affect open space, why they should support it," Lewis said.

In addition to Docktown, another property that could be affected is owned by one of the city's most prominent companies. Oracle has a sliver of land on its Redwood Shores campus that the city's general plan considers open space. A company spokeswoman said the issue is "not something that's on our radar."

Just east of there, a portion of a recently approved project called the Preserve at Redwood Shores may also be affected. That project includes about 160 townhomes, a new elementary school and about 92 acres of wetlands restoration.

Developer Max Keech said he isn't concerned about the initiative at this point because he believes it would only affect the area that will be wetlands.

"I think it would only impact us if at some point we tried to change it from restoring wetlands to doing something else," Keech said.

The fifth potentially affected property identified by the city is up the creek from Docktown near Galveston Drive and is owned by Abernathy Valley Inc., which has an address in Mountain View, said planning manager Jill Ekas.

The city attorney's final analysis of the initiative is expected sometime this month.



E-mail Shaun Bishop at sbishop@dailynewsgroup.com.