Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Claire reiterated to the audience that given the circumstances, the Zoning <br /> Administrator's ruling prevails. <br /> <br /> Public Comment: <br /> Robert J. Hoffman, the appellant, thanked Council Member Hartnett for his <br /> comments, but disagreed with his conclusion. He referred to a certified copy of the <br /> ordinance passed on February 28, 2000 received from the City Clerk. He stated <br /> paragraph 8 of the ordinance is almost a duplicate of the State Law, option no. 3 <br /> relative to large family day care homes. Mr. Hoffman stated, that it allows for <br /> notification within 100 feet, right of a hearing and right of appeal. He distributed <br /> copies of the State Law to Council and staff. Mr. Hoffman further stated that the <br /> public, published staff report is absolutely erroneous. He stated that the ordinance <br /> and the State Law are identical and stated his disagreement with Council not <br /> having jurisdiction or a right to judge on the appeal. <br /> <br /> Vernon Seim stated he built Maxwell Lane in 1962 and at that time, as <br /> businesspeople it was agreed that there would be no business there. Due to the <br /> congestion, the street was intended for ten homeowners that own businesses to <br /> not run businesses on Maxwell Lane. <br /> <br /> Mel Silva stated he agreed with the previous speaker, adding that he has more <br /> congestion in front of his house than others in the area. <br /> <br /> Lilly Radcliffe has cherished the residential area and stated it seems that an <br /> income of $150,000.00 does not address the Iow income needs and is therefore a <br /> business. <br /> <br /> Edna Acki addressed her points to the people in Ms. Silviera's day care. She <br /> asked that the day care be kept at 6 and not be increased to 14 because the block <br /> cannot handle it. <br /> <br /> Ralph Nobles stated his history as a Planning Commissioner for Redwood City <br /> and currently of San Mateo County. He stated his opinion that this instance is not <br /> appropriate and that Council should go back and pass the correct ordinance <br /> <br /> Eva Damlos referred to the ordinance and her issues with it. She stated interviews <br /> with individuals other than the Planning Commission proved to have a differing <br /> interpretation of clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the property for <br /> residential purposes. She stated the rebuttal found no indication of a shortage of <br /> day care homes in Redwood City. <br /> <br /> Ms. Elise Johnson Hoffman stated she is shocked and extremely disappointed. <br /> <br />REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2002 <br />MINUTES PAGE 7 <br /> MINUTES Book No. 59 <br /> Page No. 143 <br /> <br /> <br />