My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
1967 Jan to Dec
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1967
>
1967 Jan to Dec
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2017 2:54:19 PM
Creation date
12/16/2016 3:54:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
1/1/1967
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.
/
456
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
151 <br />type as an outcome of the President's recent Crime Study. <br />Mr. Wm. Rhodes expressed his interest in the proposed <br />project and offered his services. <br />Councilman Bury moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5419 ENDORSING RESEARCH PROJECT <br />ENTITLED "TEACH LAW TO REDUCE CRIME" seconded by Councilman Granger and carried <br />on roll call vote. <br />Councilman Keckley moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5420 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT <br />BETWEEN THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY AND THE REDWOOD CITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RELATING <br />TO BEAUTIFICATION OF PUBLIC STREETS DURING THE HOLIDAY SEASON, seconded by Councilman <br />Bury. <br />Councilman Granger stated he would approve this contribution if tree in park located <br />at intersection of Brewster, Broadway, and Arch would be given same consideration <br />for decoration as last year. Councilman Granger was advised it was understood <br />special requests would be given consideration and this should be noted. <br />(Memo 7/11/67) <br />Request was also made for a copy of accounting required in the agreement to be sub- <br />mitted to Council when received. (Memo 7/11/67) Motion carried on roll call vote. <br />Acceptance of Redwood Avenue Water System Improvements, Project W-1, GID 2-65 (Con- <br />tractor -Challenge Contracting Co.), approved as recommended by Staff, subject to <br />usual one year guarantee of workmanship and materials, on motion of Councilman <br />Petersen, seconded by Councilman Rosselli and carried. (MINUTE ORDER #67-150) <br />Application of Task Construction Co., for exceptions to Section 30.63, Redwood City <br />Code, to allow two lots with areas of 5,394 sq. ft. and 5,696 sq, ft. where areas <br />of 6,000 so. ft. are required, and for a subdivision of one parcel into two par- <br />cels, being a resubdivision of Lots 1, 2, 3, and4, Block 1, Dumbarton Tract, at <br />635-49 Douglas Avenue, presented for consideration. <br />Planning Commission report read in full in which it was stated Commission had voted <br />unanimously to recommend that the exception requested for less than the minimum <br />lot size standards be approved as submitted, subject to the condition that any addi- <br />tional sewer lateral and/or water services be installed at no expense to the City. <br />Staff report was read reviewing history of this area when Tract was formed with <br />mostly 25 x 100' lots which had since been combined into 50 x 100' lots, and of <br />present request now for resubdivision of applicant's property into two lots as his <br />property had been combined with 3 25' lots and an additional larger lot. It was <br />reported that although both lots would be slightly below minimum area standards, <br />they would conform to other City standards and therefore, recommended by Staff for <br />consideration of granting the exception requested. <br />Councilman Keckley moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5421 GRANTING EXCEPTIONS TO PRO- <br />VISIONS OF CHAPTER 30 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, BEING THE SUBDIVI- <br />SION REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, AND APPROVING A SUBDIVISION THERE- <br />UNDER - TASK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, seconded by Councilman Petersen. <br />Council further questioned subdivision proposed as to setbacks and fact numerous <br />5,000 so. ft. lots causing applications for exceptions. The question was raised <br />as to whether the 5,000 sq. ft. should be the standard rather than 6,000. Planning <br />Director explained different approach to building practices and predominate desire <br />for wider designs in home construction than previously used, which made the wider <br />lots necessary. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.