1968 339- 485 _ 1-8 to 4-15-1968

Browse Search

4a�s Report of the Planning Commission read in which it was stated Commission, after a public hearing, had recommended the rezoning requested, with the one dissenting vote noted based on opposition to extending commercial zoning any deeper into residential zoning from E1 Camino. Planning Staff report described property in question as being a vacant lot with an area of 7,285 sq, ft, and a 50' frontage on Whipple Avenue, adjacent to commercial bank and beauty shop corner site at Whipple and El Camino under common ownership. It was noted that applicant had indicated that both of the uses on the corner site were in need of additional space for expansion and ad- ditional off-street parking spaces, and that a Use Permit had been granted to allow a parking lot serving the activities in the adjacent commercial zone. It was further stated proposed zoning would establish same zoning as that across the street, similar to other commercial zoning patterns along El Camino. Wm. H. Royer, 1016 Blandford, representing applicant, stated proposed rezoning requested would tie in with the zoning to the same depth as parcels across the street and also tie in with the corner project. He advised of the proposed expansion of the bank and fact that parking would be expanded as per a use permit already granted which would alleviate the present off- street parking problems. Council questioned whether this proposed rezoning for a higher use would present higher costs when plan lines are set for widening of Whipple at some future date. Mr. Royer advised present zoning of property in R-5 and if developed to this density would certainly involve more acquisition costs than presently pro- posed parking area development. He stated further that as a property owner in this location, he felt Whipple could be widened logically by decreasing 10' sidewalks and thereby allowing another lane of traffic which he favored. He again stated plans proposed for property owner to acquire this addition- al parcel is for purpose of enlarging parking area and expansion of the present banking operation, which all depended upon the requested rezoning to make plans possible. In reply to questioning as to whether Planning Commission had ever considered a uniform extension boundary of commercial zoning from E1 Camino, Planning Director advised that various depths of property fronting on E1 Camino made such an arbitrary boundary not logical. In this instance zoning requested would result in commercial area only being matched in depth to that already established across the street and therefor recommended because it too would tie into the commercial frontage on El Camino There being no communications or oral protest, Councilman Bury moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Keckley and carried. Councilman Rosselli moved to introduce Ordinance adding Section 60.2.27 to Ordinance No. 1130, the Redwood City Zoning Ordinance, rezoning property in the vicinity of Whipple Avenue near El Camino Real, seconded by Councilman Keckley and carried. MJgI*