Laserfiche WebLink
.L— <br />409 <br />Minutes of Regular Weekly Study Meeting <br />Redwood City Council <br />January 9, 1967 7:30 P.M. <br />Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Herkner. <br />Grading Ordinance proposed for adoption discussed and questioned as to its intended <br />controls. Councilman Keckley specifically questioned controls for earth movement <br />for less than the 1,000 cu. yards. City Manager advised no requirement for controls <br />except for the provisions in the Building Code relating to slopes. Councilman Keckley <br />indicated his favoring some type of control for earth movement from 0 to 999 cu. yds., <br />even if only by Planning Commission procedures. <br />City Attorney advised a previous draft of Grading Ordinance had contained provision <br />for control and restrictions for lesser amount of earth movements than now proposed, <br />to be handled by Building Department through permit procedure which would have covered <br />basements, swimming pools, etc. for residential dwellings. Councilman Granger questioned <br />truck routes and was advised by City Manager of routes established by Ordinance and <br />of permits issued by his office. Councilman Rosselli felt proposed grading ordinance <br />affected small individual grading operation more than larger operations, restric- <br />tions for which had prompted the proposed ordinance. He asked that Staff make report <br />and recommendation before consideration given for adoption. <br />Councilman Granger questioned City's liability under such a proposed ordinance. <br />City Attorney advised more legislation added more responsibility for liability, and <br />in this particular type of legislation for which standards and specifications were <br />set for grading by City, liability was also assumed. Councilman Henderson favored <br />controls for earth movements less than 1000 cu. yds. and questioned costs to indi- <br />viduals, which would be involved for lesser amounts of earth movements. <br />City Attorney advised present ordinance as proposed intended to cover over-all <br />tract type of grading and if lesser amounts intended ordinance should be redrafted. <br />Councilman Petersen favored tabling of proposed ordinance for present time in view <br />of liability involved to City as felt controls existed for the most part through <br />other ordinances. He also cited liability which would have existed in recent <br />hillside activity if City had an existing Grading Ordinance. <br />Councilman Granger questioned basis for provisions proposed in ordinance now being <br />considered. City Attorney advised original ordinance he had drafted in 1961 had <br />been prepared from a survey of other existing grading ordinances in the Bay area, as <br />felt advantages for a similar ordinance being prepared for area where local con- <br />tractors doing business. He advised there were no State standards for such a grading <br />ordinance. Councilman Bury felt further time should be devoted for a complete in <br />depth study of proposed grading ordinance before consideration given for adoption. <br />Councilman Bury questioned whether Council Committee on Commission appointment procedures <br />intended to make recommendation for Veterans Memorial Commission vacancies. Coun- <br />cilman Petersen advised recommendation of their Committee would include this Commis- <br />sion. <br />