CITY OF RIVERSIDE
<br />
<br /> COUNCILMEMBERS
<br />
<br /> Min.tes of Re lar Meeti of the city Council
<br /> Date of MeeCt~: October 2, 1990
<br /> ',
<br /> Place of MeeCin8: Council Cmber, City Hall
<br />.................................. WARDS
<br /> Roll Call: ' '
<br />
<br /> ~yor Frizzel announced C~C C~nci~n Clar~ is attendins a codefence In Houston,
<br /> Tens, as a representative of c~ Riverside Transit ABency.
<br />
<br /> The Invocation ~s Siren ~ the Reverend ~ Theneon, Bethel ~riscian Center.
<br />
<br /> The PledBe of Alia,lance ~s Siren to the FlaS-
<br />
<br /> MI~S
<br /> The Minutes of the MeecinSs of Septemir 24 and 25, 1990, ~re approved as su~cted.
<br /> Motion ,,X
<br /> Second {X ,,
<br /> All Ayes
<br /> PMSE~ATION
<br /> ~yor Frizzel preMnted a procitation Co ~ Bald~n, Ass{sCant Di=ecto~Operacions,
<br /> of the Public Utilities Depa=~ent proclai~nS the vek of Octobe= 7-13, 1990, as Public
<br /> Po~r Week in C~ Cit~ of Riverside.
<br />
<br /> The C~i= recoBnized the preMnce in the audience of Lou Beerella representinS the
<br /> side Cheber of Cserce, Ruth Ro~ll representin8 the Ar~Con C~ber of Cserce,
<br /> Zareh Sa=rafian :epresentin8 the La Sierra C~ber of Ca=ca. J. B. Poullard represent-
<br /> i~ the ~8nolia Center ~mber of Cse=ce and Ga~ Cordray representin8 the UniversitF
<br /> Canyon Crest Chm~r of C~rce.
<br />
<br /> CONSE~
<br /> The follodnS itMs, preMntd to the Cit~ Council on the Consent Calendar for considera-
<br /> tion, we:e app=oved ~ one motion affi~ t~ actions appropriate co each its.
<br />
<br />BOARD OF ADMINISTRATIVE APFEALS AND ZONING AD3USTMENT
<br />
<br />ZONING CASE V-3~-901 - BAROLD TAYLOR, JR. - 61~0 MAGNOLIA
<br />A c~unlcation was presented from the Board of A~m~=tstrative Appeals and Zontn$ Adjust-
<br />ment adv~sin$ that, on September 10, 1990, =he Board, by a vote of ~ ayes to 1 no, ap-
<br />proved subject to conditions the request of Harold Taylor, Jr., Zonin$ Case V-3~-901,
<br />for the foilowenS variances to remodel two extstinB commercial ~LldinBs havin$ a total
<br />of approximately 12,~00 square feet on approximately 1.17 acres at 61~0 Ma$no]zLa Avenue,
<br />situated on the southeast side of Ma$nolia Avenue southwesterly of Elizabeth Street, in
<br />Zone C-3: (A) to allow parkin8 to encroach up to approximately seven feet into the re-
<br />quired ten-foot landscaped setback; and (B) to delete the three-foot-hi$h buffer re-
<br />quired =o screen the park~n~ area from property across HaSnolia Avenue; and deterttned
<br />that the proposal would not have a si$nificant adverse effect on the envirooment. The
<br />Board's approval was upheld 57 the City Council.
<br />
<br />ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION
<br />
<br />CASE EPC-72-890 - PROPOSED GRADING PI,~, TRACT 19176, LOT 13 - 1021 TALC~Y TERRACE
<br />A c~unicacion was presented from the Enviro~mental Protection Comm/ssion advisinS
<br />that, on September lZm 1990, the Commission, 57 a vote of 8 ayes to 0 noes, determined
<br />that~ althouah a proposed ~radlD8 plan for a single-family residence situaCed at
<br />1021 Talcey Terrace Drive (Tract 19176, Lot 13), Eerierally located on ~he north side of
<br />Talcey Terrace Drive easterly of Golden Star Avenue, in Zone RC, could have a signill-
<br />cant effect on the enviroment~ there will not be a sian~ficant effect in tbjLs case if
<br />certain mitlaatfn~ measures are required as part of the conditions of approval of the
<br />project, Case ~PC-72-890. The Comm~ssion~s findinS was upheld 57 the City Council.
<br />
<br />CASE EPC-23-901 - PROPOSED GRADING FLAN - 2201 ROCKWELL
<br />A communication was presented from the Envtroomental Protection Coem/ssion advistnS
<br />that, on September 12, 1990, the Commission, 57 a vote of 8 ayes to 0 noes, determined
<br />chat, althouZh a proposed Eradin8 plan for a stn8le-famtly residence situated ac
<br />2201 Rockwell Road, 8erierally located easterly of the southerly terminus of Rockwell
<br />Road south of Hawarden Drive, in Zone R-1-130, could have a stZmLftcant effect on the en-
<br />vtroment, there w~ll not be a siantficant effect in th~s case if certa/n mltlZatln8
<br />measures are required as part of the conditions of approval of the project, Case
<br />EPC-23-901. The Commission's ftndin~ was upheld by che City Council.
<br />
<br />~ Motion
<br />~ Second
<br />;All Ayes
<br />
<br />76-121
<br />
<br />
<br />
|