My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
CC MIN 1970
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1970
>
CC MIN 1970
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2017 3:09:51 PM
Creation date
8/2/2016 10:51:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
1/5/1970
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
424
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
195 <br />clearance between the buildings, and the matter of possible alternate access <br />such as from Upland Road, Planning Director advised such access had been <br />considered five years earlier, but there was no success in getting cooperation <br />of the property owners to form an assessment district to accomplish this. <br />Fire Chief Keller discussed the reasons for objection by his Department, <br />noting the difficulty they would have in bringing apparatus through to the <br />rear lot in the event of a fire. He stated it has been the policy of the Fire <br />Department to stand by the requirement of 20 feet, and dial not feel they should <br />deviate. <br />Mr. Walter Young, 643 Canyon Road, spoke in defense of his <br />request, noting it would permit parking cars off the road. <br />He indicated he knew of many areas where fire hoses have <br />been dragged further than would be required in this case. <br />He added that request was being made because he was unable <br />to maintain that large a piece of property any longer. <br />Councilman <br />Petersen <br />pointed <br />out <br />the 20 -foot <br />requirement of <br />the Fire Department <br />was minimal <br />figure <br />set, and <br />has <br />been adhered <br />to by Council, <br />and recognized there <br />was a tendency for property owners to feel that what others have done, they should <br />be allowed to do. He felt that Council in this instance had the ability to <br />insure that property is developed properly, and that it was imperative to hold <br />to the 20 foot minimum, particularly where safety is involved. <br />Council questioned Fire Chief In detail as to his views on moving fire fighting <br />equipment as it related to the property in question, and he explained that the <br />apparatus has a "cross pull" which requires being clear of obstructions to <br />operate, and it would therefore be necessary to work from the street. He <br />added that limited manpower increases the problems, and it would require a <br />20 foot minimum to get by. Council suggested as a solution cutting off part <br />of the garage. <br />Mr. Allan Semei.t, 1563 Fernside, questioned whether the <br />fire fighting apparatus could be manuevered off Canyon <br />Road to this property, noting that Canyon is very narrow. <br />Fire Chief gave assurance that since the engine has power steering, this would <br />be no problem. <br />Council questioned the possibility of splitting the rear lot, noting a recent <br />decision to permit only one unit in the rear lot in similar situation. <br />Planning Director <br />noted the requirement <br />is 50 <br />feet, and <br />less <br />frontage <br />than <br />that would <br />require <br />a Variance. He added <br />that <br />the Fire <br />Chief <br />feels 20 <br />feet <br />should be required, and Staff apparently concurs, and that in the past, Planning <br />— Commission opposed the panhandle situations, but found themselves continually <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.