CC MIN 1973 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 The Planning Director , in answer to question on what effect or non-effect of changing the lot coverage from 60% to 40% lot coverage would be , reiterated that the proposed zoning change had grown out of the Environmental Impact Reports , among other things , along with the limitation of resources in serving developments and our sewage treatment plant , He pointed out it was either pacing our develop - ment or go a certain way and then impose a moratorium . The Planning Director advised that the Planning Commission seemed to favor pacing the development and _ getting quality development in the hope that a moratorium would not have to be imposed and by the time they got to that level there would be other solutions . He also noted that information coming in from the E . I . R . reports , statewide , it had become increasingly apparent that what was thought to be a beneficial result of high density was proving to be detrimental to the City . He mentioned that the cities with the highest density of development , the largest cities , are the ones with the most drastically spiraling tax situations , which was just the opposite of what was thought originally , that the bigger a City became the more the cost could be spread . He felt that the Planning Commission did not feel the decrease from 60% to 40% lot coverage was another restriction on multiple development . Mr . J . S . Michalski , 501 Fox Court West , Redwood City , spoke against the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance . He felt that this change would be an in- verse condemnation without just compensation . There being no further discussion or written communications , Councilman Henderson moved to close the public hearing , seconded by Councilman Norris and carried . Councilman Norris moved to introduce Ordinance Amending Sections 3 , 1 , 5 . 8 , 6 . 8 , 8 , 2 , 8 . 4 , 8 . 8 , 9 . 2 , 9 . 4 , 9 . 8 , 10 . 2 , 10 . 4 , 10 . 8 , 32 . 5 , 32 . 7 , 41 . 3 , 41 . 4 , 41 . 7 , 41 . 8 , 42 . 3 , 43 . 7 , 45 . 9 and 46 . 7 of , Adding Sections 32 , 16 and 32 , 17 to , and Repealing Sections 1 . 8 , 1 . 9 and 8 . 10 of , Ordinance No . 1130 , the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Redwood City , Relating to General Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments , seconded by Councilman Rhodes . On the question Councilman Williams viewed his objections to the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance in that he pre- ferred to refer it back to the Planning Commission for modifications and that he was concerned regarding the proposed use permit process , however , he felt that most of the changes were quite attractive . Mayor Keckley agreed with all the proposed changes that the Planning Commission recommended , with the exception of Section 8 . 2 and his concern with regard to the changing of the maximum square footage per unit , and felt he would have to go along with Councilman Williams and vote against this particular issue at this time . Councilman Norris supported the Zoning Ordinance in that he felt it would put everybody on notice as to what the City wants the community to look like - quality development with the amenities that we are all entitled to have . Councilman Rhodes felt this Zoning Ordinance amendment would give the City the flexibility it needs to keep the density down . Councilman Henderson spoke in support of the issue in that it was an action per- tinent to the times , Councilman Weymouth ' s concern was in the E . I . R . reports as discussed previously . Motion carried on roll call vote , Councilmen Henderson , Leipzig , Norris and Rhodes voting Yes , Councilmen Weymouth , Williams and Mayor Keckley voting No , APPEAL of David Ransom, Redwood City Housing Union, and Maxim K . Rice , Land for People Organization , on Architectural Committee ' s approval of Architectural Permit for 30 -unit apartment complex at 601 Leahy Street . (Donald C . and Marjorie A , Nystrom , Owners ) . On July 23 , 1973 , Council held public hearing on the subject appeal , took testi - mony and thereafter closed the public hearing . Since the matter originally was appealed direct from the Architectural Review Committee to the Council , determi - nation was made to refer results of the public hearing to the Planning Commission for recommendations back to Council , The Planning Commission considered the appeal on August 14 , and acted to confirm unanimously the action of the Architec - tural Committee in granting the Architectural Permit . (Full report was submitted to Council . ) City Clerk read the communication left by David Ransom , appellant , prior to the public hearing , urging Council to deny Architectural Committee ' s approval of -- Architectural Permit for this project . Assistant City Attorney advised that he wanted it noted for the record that the Staff did bring the E . I . R . report to the attention of the Architectural Committee that the Architectural Committee fully understood the E . I . R . report and that this complies with Resolution 6882 and the provisions thereof . Councilman Rhodes moved to affirm the action of the Architectural Committee , second - ed by Councilman Weymouth and carried , Councilmen Henderson and Williams ab - staining from participation having been absent from the public hearing . •- _. (MINUTE ORDER 73 - 119) Introduction of Ordinance establishing the Tax Rate - Fiscal Year 1973 -1974 Proposal of Mobil Oil Estates ( Redwood ) Limited to contribute funds to GID 1 -64 , in order to make up for the loss of assessed value within the District as a re - sult of a pending transfer of property from Mobil to the State of California , and 8/27/73 Reg . Mtg . .__ ....1._... . .. .. _ _ ._ ___ -.-L _