Laserfiche WebLink
398 <br />PUBLIC HEARING, Resolution of Intention of the Planning Commission to amend Article <br />46, Zoning Ordinance No. 1130, relating to Planned Development Permits declared <br />open and affidavit of publication ordered filed. <br />Council discussed the Planning Commission's recommendations concerning changes <br />in the Planned Development Permit provision (Article 46) of the Zoning Ordinance, <br />at the Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission on January 29, 1968, and <br />after Council's approval of the proposed revisions, this matter was set for <br />public hearing on this date. <br />There being no communications, or oral protest, Councilman Petersen moved to <br />close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Granger and carried. <br />Councilman Granger moved to introduce Ordinance repealing Sections 46.1 <br />through 46.11, inclusive, of Article 46 of Ordinance No. 1130, the Redwood City <br />Zoning Ordinance, and adding Sections 46.1 through 46.12, inclusive,to said <br />Article and Ordinance, relating to Planned Development Permits, seconded by <br />Councilman Bury. <br />On question, Councilman Keekley stated he does not favor the inclusion of <br />granting a 20% density increase bonus to developer of a planned development <br />as he felt developer received sufficient savings in this type of procedure <br />without being allowed to increase density. He conceded, however, sufficient <br />safeguards seemed to have been added, but expressed hope that Planning Staff <br />would continually review this section for purpose of achieving a still <br />better planned development procedure. Councilman Bury expressed concern on <br />accesory uses allowable in proposed amendment but felt it, too, had been given <br />safeguards to insure compatible uses with adjacent areas. <br />After further discussion, Councilman Henderson moved to amend Ordinance as <br />proposed by deleting 20% allowable density increase, seconded by Councilman <br />Keckley. Councilman Petersen felt the proposed 20% density increase should <br />be retained in the Ordinance. As pointed out, this is a maximum percentage <br />only which could be allowed under certain definite conditions, and that suf- <br />ficient safeguards had been included to insure this not being given as a standard <br />practice, but as an incentive to promote a better development. Councilman Bury <br />concurred with retaining this density increase bonus as an added incentive for <br />a developer to create a superior development, and felt this procedure presented <br />a modern development technique giving more latitude for encouraging better <br />developments. Motion on amendment lost on roll call vote, Councilmen Bury, <br />Granger, Petersen, and Mayor Herkner voting no, Councilmen Henderson and <br />Keckley voting yes, Councilman Rosselli being noted absent. <br />Motion to introduce Ordinance carried. <br />rte It 1B <br />FEB 12 '68 <br />