CC MIN 1973 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Vice Mayor Henderson announced for benefit of those present there would be an Executive Session at end of this Regular Meeting for discussion of a personnel matter , which would be reconvened to the Regular Meeting for purpose of adjourn- ment only since no Council action proposed to be taken . Councilman Rhodes requested that Council consideration be given now , for benefit of those that might be present and interested , for postponement of Agenda item on __ an Ordinance listed for adoption consideration relating to an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance relating to General Zoning Ordinance text amendments . Vice Mayor Henderson expressed her support of request if same be considered as Item 1-A on the Agenda . Vice Mayor Henderson introduced Joseph L . Lodi , former Fire Chief and presently "Mr . Pride " of Redwood City ' s Chamber of Commerce promotional campaign , for his presentation to Council members . "Mr . Pride " advised each shareholder in this promotional campaign paid $ 5 . 00 to become a Booster . member and announced that he was pleased to note that Mayor Keckley was noted by coincidence to be the 100th "Booster " when purchasing his certificate , and that the Council membership was 100% and first of such group to achieve this recognition . Vice Mayor expressed her desire Council Membership be noted as a " team " . Booster Certificate Member- ships then presented to Councilmen Weymouth , Williams , Rhodes , and Mayor Keckley (absent ) and City Manager James M . Fales . Mr . Lodi stated those having purchased and received their certificates prior were Vice Mayor Henderson , Councilmen Leipzig and Norris . Vice Mayor Henderson noted that item on Agenda being requested for a review at this time because of those present that might be interested was Item No . 10 ( a ) under Consent Calendar which was consideration for adoption of an Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance relating to General Zoning Ordinance text amendments , introduced at Council ' s last regular meeting , after a public hearing , on August 27 , 1973 . Councilman Rhodes stated since having voted in favor of this Ordinance when introduced he now had reservations and concerns and would move to continue this item for adoption consideration and refer to Staff for additional study and further report , seconded by Councilman Williams . Councilman Williams noted he had opposed the introduction when Ordinance was presented , not because he was particularly opposed to the total Ordinance but would like to know more of its ramifications . City Manager recommended that this item should be continued to a date and time certain since he would like to set up a system of reporting back to Council and would more particularly recommend that concerns and questions be made more articulate in order for Staff to catalogue and compile such for re - search . Vice Mayor Henderson reported that Mayor Keckley had noted three areas of concern relating to this proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment : ( 1 ) What effect on the assessed valuation with the changes proposed , a concern for which she concurred and would like to be reported on by Staff ; ( 2 ) Potential for pro - ✓ iding housing for low and moderate income families and how to be effected in proposed changes in these proposed amendments ; ( 3 ) What effect the switch from 60% to 40% lot coverage would have with the proposed changes in the ordinance . Councilman Rhodes stated he would like a report indicating effect of the amount of depreciation on property proposed changes would effect , the decrease in the tax base ; and what effect shift of this decreased tax would be on other single family residences ; what long - range effect on older apartments which would then be nonconforming and could go on forever without proper maintenance as noncon - forming units - -would this proposed amendment hinder redevelopment when under new o rdinance . City Attorney advised procedure on this ordinance now contemplated by Council had been subject to a public hearing and would recommend if scope of reports expanded beyond more than a supplemental report by adding points beyond scope of records and evidence of public hearing , Staff should advise Council so that a new public hearing may be set in order that public may respond to such items . Vice Mayor noted that in conferring with Mayor it had been noted from Council calendar that it would probably not be possible to have this matter before the Council again until the first part of November , but possibility had also been noted of the desirability for a joint meeting with the Planning Commission prior to that time to review in detail this proposed amendment and questioned propriety of this proposal of City Attorney . City Attorney noted provisions of the Zoning Ordinance which detailed referral procedures to Planning Commission with Council having to take final action , although technique possible for perhaps a dual public hearing with Planning Commission invited to be present and participate w ith Council still being required to take the final and separate action at con - clusion of the hearing . He advised he felt that a prior meeting with Planning Commission would not be appropriate , but also noted possibility of re - opening the public hearing on this matter since Ordinance under discussion had already been introduced and published , and if no changes were to be made after a re - - opening of the prior hearing , action could be taken on same Ordinance , but any substantial revisions would require setting another public hearing and require the ten day public hearing notice . After further discussion , original motion amended and clarified to direct a re - opening of public hearing held by Council on August 27 , 1973 on Planning Com- mission ' s Resolution of Intention initiating proceedings to amend certain 9/17/73 Reg . Mtg . - - . . .