CC MIN 1956 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

�01'?T_ IIUATIUPI OF ? A��IP1G, P?OPOSED REZONING OF DALE STUART MCPERTY. 277 Mr. Stuart read a very long prepared statement. He stated that rather than loose the zoning altogether he would make some effort to comply to the 13 units. The question was raised as to whether or not Mr. Stuart would be .willing to, on his own, record a deed of restriction. Mr. Stuart stated that he would not do this and further he did not think it would be legal. This was followed by further discussion. Councilman Granger moved that the public hearing be closed, seconded by Councilman Stout. T.Ir. Haney spoke on the question. The motion carried. Councilman Weiss read the following prepared statement: Iterq # 2 - September 11, 1956. I am by no means desireous of raising further controversy on this matter but I must state that I was present at the planning commission meeting when this matter was considered. Icy understanding was that the motion to rezone in accordance with our referral, which a indicated our intention to rezone, lost as a result of failure to obtain the necessary "Aye" votes, and the the chair stated that it would thus be submitted to the council without recommendation, and that naturally is the,logical approach under the circumstances. This matter has been explored on a number of accasions, both by the Planning Commission and the Council; the facts should be pretty evident to us all. The Planning Commission on every occasion, except for its presently undecisive action, has indicated its thinking that the property should for the present remain R-2. Further the Council, for all practical purposes has clearly indicated by adoption of a motion by a five to two vote on July ,23, that it is its intention to rezone this property back to R-23 and the Mayor clearly stated for the benefit'of the audience and 111r. Stuart that such action decided what.•the intention of the council was. Under the circumstances I see no alternative but to move that the City Attorney be instructed to prepare an ordinance for introduction rezoning said property from R-3 to R-2, all in accordance with our previously announced intention as expressed on July 23, 1956, seconded by Councilman Stout and carried on roll call, Mayor Royer voting No and Councilman Britschgi and Spillers being noted absent. It was explained to Mr. Stuart the ordinance would be introduced at the Spotember 17th meeting and adopted at the October lst meeting, to be effective 30 days later. PERSON!tL APPEARANCE, KET1,24ETH MILLE, 260 G Street, regarding Golf Practise Range causing hazard in area. An appeal made by residents and citizens of "G" Street for assistance in relieving them of ever present dangers arising from the Golf Practice Range was presented. The Mayor asked that since this was in San Carlos the City Manager's office contact the San-Iffood Range to see if they could take care of this matter. The Clerk was asked to read the letter. Councilman Stout asked the jurisdiction of the Police Department. He believes that the City should take immediate steps even if it means that the Police Chief is requested to contact the San Carlos Police Chief in an attempt to put an immediate stop until such time as this can be fixed. Police Cheief Faulstich stated that the offence takes place in San Carlos and the damage takes place in Redwood City. City Attorney Costello suggested that s -me official in Redwood City contact some official in San Carlos on this matter and ask that they take measures to correct same. This is a civil matter., This was followed by discussion. Councilman Granger moved that the proper authorities in San Carlos be furnished with a copy of this letter or the original letter in order to get immediate relief in Red -rood City, seconded by .Councilman Herkner and carried. Councilman VTeiss moved that the City Manager's of Vice follow through and report back next week, seconded by Councilman Granger and carried. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND CONTRACT ON DREDGING OF THE YACHT HARBOR. City Engineer Jain stated that there is a number of large pieces of concrete which can not be moved by the dredge and it is causing a number of delays. The specifications do not cover this exactly. He further stated that the Company would allow the City one day or they would charge the City $105.00 an hour for anything over and above the one day. City Engineer Jain recommended to pay $105.00 per hour for each hour of such delay over and above an average of 2 hour per 8 hour working shift. Fractional hours will be appropriately prorated. Councilman T"feiss asked about the rate. City Engineer Jain stated that 7 men work on a shift. Councilman 7eiss moved that the City Attorney be authorized to draw up the necessary resolution to permit the amendment to the contract, seconded by Councilman Herkner who asked that if this condition gets relatively worse and if they can find that certain areas are such that they can be left, out that they be by-passed. Mr. Jain stated,;that they