|
rt,
<br />'ty
<br />iVr,
<br />243 � IV. Nt� ,JARRARD, 2063 Arroyo Street, San Carlos, one of the bishops counselors pre_ k1
<br />sonted a sketch and discussed setbacks which vrere adequate with other properties on
<br />the street. �I
<br />�I
<br />350 Grand Street, Redwood City, Property '
<br />pabt S- yOUI;IAII, p rty owner here, presented a plan shovr- ti 7
<br />ing parking area which he wished to file with the City Clerk.' II
<br />FOLLOWING APPEARED AND PROTESTED THE BUILDING OF THE CHURCH IN THIS AREA. Mr.
<br />iOE lfdalter F
<br />h 81 Melrose, Redwood City taxpayer, objected to an
<br />bturp y, any building in the
<br />area and offered to dispose of his $47,000 home for $ 2,000 if the church vras permitted
<br />to build here. Mr. Marion Walker, i29 Tur'nsworth, Redwood City taxpayer, Mr. Harvey
<br />Stul, 979 Edgewood Road, Redwood City Taxpayer, Mr. James Smith, 964 Dunston Road,
<br />82L RoadMr.
<br />1Frs. Pdarten Levy, I- Arlington g ,, Harold Shanzer, 910 Edgewood, Mr. Geo.
<br />Ito Gaffigan, Lir. John Evans, 921 Arlington Road, Dr. IV. F. Hart, 920 Ediewood,Road, Mr. 11', I i
<br />an Shotviell, all objected to building of the church, because of traffic, danger to
<br />3,A
<br />shildren in the area, to a semi-public building in their area, and felt it would lower l
<br />the value of their property.
<br />}R, EARL THOMAS, 133 Woodsworth Avenue, Redwood City taxpayer, stated he was a memberof the
<br />it
<br />church, lived in the area and did not feel that it would lower the value of his home,
<br />and that many who were not present were just as much aroused by personal opinion in {f}} KI I lY
<br />favor of the church rights to build here and it seemed those who opposed the structure
<br />were not interested in the benefit of a church, but how it affected them as an indivi-
<br />dual. Mr. Chas J. Shields, 910 Hopkins Avenue, stated the present building was
<br />inadequate on Middlefield Road.
<br />Yr, Myron Goldsmith, 958 Blandford, Redwood City taxpayer, Mr. Henry Nissen, 904 Arlington ( !
<br />V'I++
<br />Road, Mr. W. C. Howell, 961 Edgewood Road, Mr. Harry Raskin, 807 Edgewood Road, Mr.
<br />Jacobs, 755 Arlington Road and Mrs. Stull, all opposed the church building and some
<br />felt the majority should rule in this case.
<br />BOTA SIDES HAVING BEEN HEARD, the hearing was closed.
<br />COORGILIMN ROYER STATED THE COUNCIL HAD MORE OR LESS CHECKED BOTH PETITIONS and he felt the ! I�
<br />Planning Commission was justified in their action and offered resolution and moved
<br />I„
<br />adoption upholding their recommendation denying Use Permit, seconded by Councilman
<br />al
<br />hr an, Councilman Granger stated he had made several es of notes for and against
<br />G g �!
<br />e wished to
<br />this request and he would like to give the church some consideration and h ?; i� b ,
<br />give the same consideration to the next applicant, should it come before the Council.
<br />Any vote that he would cast this evening would be based on the majority of the people
<br />affected in the area where the church was going to be located. On roll call motion
<br />carried, Councilmen Granger, Herkner, and Jones stating they were casting their Yes
<br />vote in support of the Majority affected in this area.
<br />L'4YORget
<br />6RITSCHGI THANKED ALL, for their attentiveness enablingthem to et through with the (( k
<br />g
<br />hearing in better time.
<br />�AIOILMAN I4ORGAN MOVED ADJOURNMENT to Tuesday, February 6th, in order to complete the - ' ,1
<br />rl# ,,
<br />agenda, seconded by Councilman Spillers. Adjournment 10:30 P.Id. :.Motion carried,
<br />Oouncilma
<br />n Herkner voting No.
<br />RALPH S. DODGE
<br />City'Clerk ii
<br />
|