CC MIN 1970 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

204 Minutes of Regular Meeting Redwood City Council May 18, 1970 7:30 P.M. Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Petersen. Invocation led by Reverend Barry Wilbanks, First Christian Church. ON ROLL CALL, the following were noted present: Councilman Dixon Arnett, Paul C. Keckley, Herbert G. Petersen, William C. Rhodes, Ray A. Weymouth, Mayor Robert H. Bury and City Clerk Marian McCrindle. Councilman Mary W. Henderson was noted absent. Also noted present were City Manager Howard C. Ullrich, City Attorney David E. Schricker, Assistant City Manager Henry V. Burget, Deputy Police Chief Joel Mansfield, Fire Chief John Keller, Chief Building Official Charles Gyselbrecht, Director of Public Works J. Louis Scherer, City Treasurer Harriet Driven, Senior Planner Speer McClellan, and Secretary Frances Ozzanto, Councilman Keckley moved to approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 11, 1970, as mailed, seconded by Councilman Arnett and carried. PUBLIC HEARING, Application of Ramon Ramirez, 1025 Eighth Avenue, Redwood City, for permit to move a one-story wood frame duplex from 108-116 Hermosa Street, San Bruno, to 1016-1018 Dodge Drive, Redwood City (Lot 10, Block 3, Dodge Subdivision) in an R-2 (Residential - Duplex) Zoning District, declared open and affidavits of posting and mailing ordered filed. Communication in protest of the application were reported as being received from: Walter E. and Carole L. Schubert, 1044-1046 Dodge Drive and 1047-1049 8th Avenue, Mrs. Mary Jo Smith, 1029 8th Avenue, Raymond F. Christensen, 1009-11 Dodge Drive and 1015-1017 Dodge Drive. Petition signed by owners of seventeen (17) properties in vicinity. Mayor Bury invited Mr. Ramon Ramirez, 1025 8th Avenue, to come forward with any additional information in support of his application. Mr. Ramirez stated he did not speak English well, and was assisted through interpretation by Mr. Salvador Gomez who advised there was nothing additional to submit. Reports dated May 12 and May 18, 1970 of the Chief Building Official were read, followed by Council discussion with particular reference to the conditions recommended in the May 18 report because of a revised plot plan being submitted, that (1) applicant submit a survey prepared by a licensed surveyor, verifying dimensions of proposed building; (2) architectural permit from Planning Depart- ment be required; (3) building must conform to all present City Building Code requirements, and (4) occupancy be subject to Planning approval related to architectural requirements and conformance to the City's Building Codes. Concern was expressed by Council that in agreeing to comply with these conditions, the applicant understood the significance of what was required.