Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Canada Corners topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodside council continues Canada Corners parklet and parking proposal to Dec. 10 after hours of debate
Summary
After a multi-hour public hearing that drew dozens of speakers for and against, the Woodside Town Council voted to continue the Canada Corners application — a proposal that would add permanent parklets and expand rear parking by modifying an open-space easement — to its Dec. 10 meeting for more analysis and revised materials.
The Woodside Town Council on Oct. 22 continued a contentious public hearing on the Canada Corners application to Dec. 10 after more than ten hours of staff presentations, applicant testimony and public comment.
The project, proposed by the owners of the Canada Corners shopping center, would replace temporary parklets with smaller permanent parklets in front of Bucks and The Village Bakery and expand a rear parking lot by roughly 34 net spaces. Staff said that would increase the site’s total from 55 to 109 spaces and require eight separate entitlements, including a conditional use permit amendment, a grading exception, a variance to parking-space dimensions, a partial vacation or modification of a 1980 open-space easement, and rezoning of the rear parcel consistent with the voter-approved Measure A.
“This project has been designed not only to benefit Canada Corners, but to benefit the community,” Lee Prince, the applicant’s land-use attorney, told the council. He said the owner has revised plans in response to committee comments and emphasized the package’s trail and crosswalk improvements and new seating limits tied to the updated CUP.
Opponents urged the council to pause the project and require more information. Multiple neighbors warned that vacating the open-space easement would permanently alter an area they said was dedicated for protection, and several public speakers questioned whether existing restaurant seating limits under earlier CUPs have been enforced. “This will transform a beautiful walkable area into a concrete and blacktop jungle,” said a letter read into the record by a neighbor unable to attend.
Several council members asked technical and policy questions: whether the town’s existing parking formula (a retail/square-footage ratio used to allocate spaces) is outdated and should be reexamined; whether alternative surfacing or tree wells could reduce visual impact; and what interim enforcement should be imposed if approvals are delayed. Staff and the applicant said site constraints (a creek corridor, a sewer easement and required fire access) limit design options but agreed to study additional screening, lighting and patrol conditions.
Town Attorney Jean reminded council members that Measure A authorized limited improvements on the identified parcel and that an applicant may now propose a parking lot there, but any expansion would still need the findings and conditions a CUP requires. Jean also flagged that abandonment or modification of an open-space easement requires specific findings under state law and raised the need for a clear factual record if council contemplates such an action.
Public comment stretched across many hours and showed a deep split: residents who backed Measure A and the project as a way to preserve outdoor dining and ease parking urged approval with reasonable conditions; residents who opposed the loss of green space and raised enforcement and safety concerns urged denial or a pause until the town produces better data and a center-wide plan.
Before the vote to continue, several council members asked staff to produce a narrower set of deliverables for the next hearing: a verified seat count for on-site restaurants, a written enforcement plan and options for interim measures, scenario analyses of alternative parking-ratio methodologies, and clearer screening or design alternatives that balance parking yield with neighbor impacts.
The motion to continue the item to Dec. 10 passed on roll call (majority in favor, one council member recorded a dissent). The council made clear there will be a second public hearing and that the updated materials will be posted in advance.
What happens next: staff and the applicant will return with responses to the council’s requests and revised plans. The council’s Dec. 10 agenda packet will include the updated design, any proposed code or ratio analyses, and staff recommendations on enforcement and interim measures.
— Reporting by Woodside Town Council meeting minutes and presentations; direct quotes come from speakers at the Oct. 22 hearing.
