|
1
<br /> Minutes of Regular Meeting
<br /> Redwood City Council
<br /> August 27 , 1973 7 : 30 P . M .
<br /> Veterans Memorial Building
<br /> Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Williams .
<br /> Invocation was led by Reverend David Howell , First Congregational Church .
<br /> ON ROLL CALL the following were noted present : Councilmen Mary W . Henderson ,
<br /> Marguerite Leipzig , Robert E . Norris , William C . Rhodes , Ray A . Weymouth , James S .
<br /> Williams , Mayor Paul C . Keckley and City Clerk Marian McCrindle . Also noted
<br /> present were City Manager James M . Pales , Jr . , Assistant City Attorney Clark
<br /> Maloney , Assistant City Manager James M . Smith , Planning Director Ken Schroeter ,
<br /> Acting Chief of Police George Bold , City Controller Jack Ference , Director of
<br /> Public Works Richard J . Pusich , Director of Parks and Recreation Max C . Weeks ,
<br /> and Stenographer Anna Hampton .
<br /> Councilman Norris moved to approve , as submitted , Minutes of Regular Meeting of
<br /> August 13 , 1973 , seconded by Councilman Leipzig and carried .
<br /> PUBLIC HEARING , Weed Abatement Assessments , 1973 declared open and affidavits of
<br /> publication and posting ordered filed . The charges for the work completed under
<br /> the weed abatement program have been submitted by the Department of Public Works ,
<br /> showing the cost to each individual parcel . Total to be posted to the County
<br /> Assessment Roll was $4 , 598 . 26 .
<br /> There being no communications or oral discussion , Councilman Weymouth moved to
<br /> close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Henderson and carried .
<br /> Councilman Norris moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO . 6978 CONFIRMING REPORT OF SUPERIN-
<br /> TENDENT OF STREETS OF WEED ABATEMENT , OVERRULING PROTESTS THERETO AND AUTHORIZ -
<br /> ING DELIVERY OF REPORT FOR THE ADDITION OF THE ASSESSMENT AMOUNTS TO NEXT REGULAR
<br /> TAX BILLS AGAINST PARTICULAR PARCELS CONCERNED , seconded by Councilman Rhodes and
<br /> carried on roll call vote .
<br /> Continued PUBLIC HEARING , Resolution of Intention of the Planning Commission to
<br /> initiate proceedings to amend certain sections of the Zoning Ordinance , No . 1130 ,
<br /> relating to General Zoning Ordinance text amendments declared opened , and affi -
<br /> davit of publication ordered filed . There were no written communications .
<br /> It was noted this public hearing was continued at request of Council , without
<br /> opening , from Council meeting of July 23 , 1973 for more information to be sub-
<br /> mitted and to allow more public notice , Marked -up proposed ordinance showing
<br /> new material , deletions , and analysis of proposed amendments were submitted to
<br /> Council August 17 , as had been requested .
<br /> In answer to Councilman Rhodes ' concern regarding the criteria and philosophy of
<br /> the use permit proposal in amendment which would increase the number of units
<br /> per lot and whether a property owner would be able to assess his chances of
<br /> getting a use permit , the Planning Director advised of the availability of the
<br /> Planning Commissioners present who would also be able to speak to these questions
<br /> if Council desired . He went on to say that the borderline between a use permit
<br /> and a no use permit was set at a uniform 14 units per acre but that greater
<br /> densities would be allowed from one district to the next .
<br /> Contingent upon getting these permits , with the idea either based upon the design
<br /> of the development , or on the surrounding area , or based on the resources avail-
<br /> able in that particular location at that particular point in time , a greater or
<br /> lesser density of the development may be appropriate . He gave as an example a
<br /> poorly designed development at a given density would probably have a harder time
<br /> getting a use permit than a well designed development . Also , it had been found
<br /> that in some locations in the City the sewage treatment system capability would
<br /> actually be enhanced by a greater flow , therefore a well designed project at a
<br /> higher density would be in order . He noted that the use permit would allow an
<br /> increased amount of opportunity for not only the Planning Commission but the City
<br /> Council to evaluate each project on its own merits in its specific location at a
<br /> particular point in time . On further questioning , he commented that he felt the
<br /> property owners would have a better chance of assessing their property , particu-
<br /> larly since they would be aware in advance of the consideration to be given their
<br /> applications which would take into account the factor of their designs . In an-
<br /> ticipation of this change , experience had shown that a number of developers were
<br /> beginning to hire architects , where they might not have hired them at one time ,
<br /> with regard to a well designed project in order to acquire a use permit .
<br /> In response to Mayor Keckley ' s concern that the previous changes in the Zoning
<br /> Ordinance were based upon the same premise as now being used , i . e . the increase
<br /> of open space requirements , the change of set backs , etc . the better the quality
<br /> of architecture - the more units that would be allowed - except that we are
<br /> making it more difficult for the developers , the Planning Director noted that it
<br /> 8/27/73
<br /> Reg . Mtg .
<br /> - - - -_---- -- --r - ..
<br />
|