CC Min 1991-08-12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Originator and seconder of the motion withdrew the motion. Mayor La Berge opened the Public Hearing at 8:27 p.m. and invited anyone who wished to speak to please do so. Senior Planner Passanisi presented the staff report and advised this site is adjacent to a residential area thereby initiating more stringent requirements than fast-food businesses in commercial areas. William Ross, Cornish and Carey Realty, speaking on behalf of the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Cravalho and Mr. and Mrs. Stanley Mitchell advised the requirement for an EIR on such a small project was unnecessary, and that a traffic study would be sufficient; noise and litter problems would be best addressed through present zoning restrictions; other fast-food projects were not required to have an EIR; and owners need decision and direction from Council before they can continue to market this property. Clarence Cravalho, owner of 120 El Camino Real, described history of property and Chinese restaurant facility for first 20 years of ownership; vacancy of last two years and negotiations with Taco Bell, Inc.; El Camino Real as most commercial street in Redwood City; no more traffic than with first restaurant; difficulty in getting company to do an EIR; and Planning Commission did not require EIR for other fast-food businesses. Gerry Mitchell, co-owner of 120 El Camino Real, apologized for Taco Bell, Inc. withdrawing support of appeal at last minute; described owners' efforts to ensure the best business for that property mindful of its neighborhood position, rejecting offers from liquor stores and adult book stores; advised Council it was unfair that neighbors had more decision making authority over their own property than they did; and described the $160,000 Taco Bell had already spent to secure the property and advising the additional expense of an EIR was too much. Stanley Mitchell, co-owner of 120 El Camino Real, expressed dismay that Council was concerned about a drive through component when Taco Bell had agreed not to include one now or in the future. In response to a question from the City Attorney, Mr. Mitchell advised he had not done a cost analysis of a focused EIR versus a negative declaration for a traffic study. Daniel Ponti, 54 Finger Avenue, Redwood City, spoke in favor of rejecting the appeal on the grounds an EIR was justified to provide information on traffic, especially current parking problems, noise, light and litter impacts; noted past and present problems with nearby fast-food restaurants and a gas station; and desire of all parties to resolve this issue. Ralph Nobles, 3720 Country Club Drive, Redwood City Planning Commissioner, described IImandatory findings of significancell made by the Planning Commission in reaching decision to require and EIR. Regular Meeting Minutes August 12, 1991 Page 6 MINUTE BOOK NO. 50 Page No. 330 ì .I.---"T.~..-- ,---