CC Min 1989-03-20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Item No. 2 (continued) Richard Claire, 244 Alameda de las Pulgas, Redwood City advised ownership of property is in question as Gary Ernst has option to buy from Michael Murphy who works at Redwood Associates Realtors; and asked Council to deny appeal citing current R -1 zoning and maintaining character of neighborhood; increased and dangerous traffic problems resulting from increased densities and unsafe driveways; loss of privacy along the 200' side property line; other flag lots were created when properties were under County jurisdiction, not City; this proposal deviates 43% from the norm set by the zoning ordinance; and if Council wants to change the required 35' frontage it should be done by changing the ordinance and not by granting variances. Mary Lynott, 2723 Hopkins Avenue, Redwood City, citing loss of privacy. Richard Muratore, 250 Alameda de las Pulgas, Redwood City citing a flag lot creates an alley next to a house going to a house in a back yard; both houses would be very expensive, not moderate as claimed; backyard privacy is very important. Lee Scholes, 2707 Hopkins, Redwood City citing exhaust fumes spew into patio area now and with new driveway and new cars along his back fence problem will get worse; traffic noise from cars in front on the Alameda is a problem and will be worse if new driveway is allowed along his back fence; and if flag lots really will solve housing problems, then change zoning laws and allow everyone to build second houses in back yards. Mrs. Clarence Scholes, 2707 Hopkins, Redwood City asking when is it going to stop? and citing the loss of privacy, trees, sunlight; and the increase in traffic noise and smell drifting into their patio. Greg Gomes, 64 Circle Road, Redwood City citing current sewer and water problems in the area and the need to be aware of the future needs of Sequoia Hospital; new homes will not be moderately priced; new owner will build, take the profit and not be a neighbor or part of the community. Steve Carpol, in rebuttal, advised his client would assure privacy of neighbors by guaranteeing one -story structures on new lots; willingness to build fences or other structures as mitigation measures against traffic noise; would engineer ingress /egress to highest safety standards; described adequacy of lots to support structures of 2400 feet in front and 3000 feet in back; and cited belief that ordinance is sufficient to give Council a tool to extract concessions from developers and to allow for variances when justified as this one is. Mayor Greenalch asked if anyone else wished to speak. No one else wished to speak. M /S: Murray /Buchan to close the public hearing. Carried by unanimous voice vote and public hearing closed at 9:13 p.m. Council discussion ensued citing need to retain R -1 character of designated neighborhoods if possible; need to limit traffic congestion; consideration of existing ordinances as they relate to housing needs in Redwood City; the MINUTE BOOK NO. 48 Reg.Mtg. Page No. 332 3/20/89 Page 3