My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
CC MIN 1977
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
CC MIN 1977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2016 11:11:42 AM
Creation date
8/2/2011 4:06:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
1/3/1976
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.
/
402
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
�16 <br /> provided by the alleyway, the fact that the applicant must have been <br /> aware of the sideyard requirement when he recently acquired the <br /> property; the need to maintain older neighborhoods, and the possible <br /> use of the property by prospective future buyers <br /> The motion failed on the following roll call vote: ' <br /> Ayes• Councilmen Bury, Norris and Mayor Le�pzig <br /> Noes Councilman Barrett, Biagt, Rhodes, Vega <br /> MOTION Councilman Barrett moved, seconded by Councilman Biagi, to <br /> reverse the Planning Commission and g,�ant the variance to permit <br /> the construction of a second dwelling unit behind an original dwell- <br /> ing unit with a nine-foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required <br /> at 3048 Hoover Street, based on the following findings: <br /> 1 Special circumstances would not exist in that improvements <br /> on a substantial proportion of other lots similarly situated <br /> in the vic�nity and surrounding the sub,7ect property are <br /> constructed with sideyards less than that required by <br /> ordinance and that primary access to the proposed unit <br /> will be afforded by an alley rather than the s�de yard <br /> to which the variance applies <br /> 2. It is not a special privilege in that a substantial pro- <br /> portion of other properties similarly situated in the <br /> vicinity and surrounding the sub�ect property are improved <br /> with side yards less than that required by ordinance. <br /> 3. It is not contrary to the ordinance in that the proposed � <br /> construction and use with exception granted will be con- <br /> sistent with similar construction and use in the area, and <br /> likewise sub�ect to the Zoning Ordinance, and further that <br /> the exception is one of degree only, and not a radical <br /> variation from the requirements of the ordinance. <br /> The motion carried on the following roll call vote. <br /> Ayes Councilmen Barrett, Biagi, Rhodes, Vega <br /> Noes: Councilmen Bury, Norris and Mayor Leipzig <br /> (MINUTE ORDER N0. 77-10) <br /> (The Council recessed from 8•ZO to 8 26 p m) <br /> Planninq Commission recommendation re <br /> exce tions to Subdivision Ordinance <br /> 217 Hemlock Street Frank Carli, Applicant) <br /> City Manager Fales referred to the material furnished to Council <br /> by the Planning Department with the Planning Commission recommen- <br /> dation <br /> In response to questions, Planning Director Schroeter advised that , <br /> he cannot comnent on possible increased assessment to the neighbors <br /> if the former lot line creating two 5,000 square foot lots is re- <br /> established, that all other lots on the block contain 5,000 feet, <br /> -3- <br /> Reg.Mtg. <br /> 1/10/77 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.