CC Min 1989-04-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Item No. 5 (continued) NOW THEREFORE, this Council hereby finds, determines and concludes as follows: FINDINGS 1. The property is located in the R -1 (Residential - Single Family) Zoning district (Sections 5.1 et seq., Ordinance 1130, as amended ( "Zon. Ord." ) of the City of Redwood City. 2. Appellant applied for a subdivision of the property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 30 (commencing with S30.1 of the Code of the City of Redwood City regulating subdivisions) to establish two lots, one of which would be a "panhandle lot" (or, "flag lot ") i.e., a lot with street frontage and access with less than the minimum required under the subdivision regulations (R.C. C. S30.117(f). Access to the panhandle lot would be provided by a 20 -foot wide driveway extending from Alameda de las Pulgas to the larger portion of the second lot. 3. On or about January 10, 1989, the City's Subdivision Committee held a hearing on the application, and upon the conclusion thereof, denied Appellant's application. 4. On February 7, 1989 the Planning commission held a hearing on Appellant's appeal of the denial of the application by the Subdivision Committee. The Planning Commission denied the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Subdivision Committee. 5. The property is rectangular in shape, its terrain is flat, and it encompasses approximately 17,041 square feet. 6. Subdivision (f) of Section 3.117 of the Redwood City code provides: "Section 3.117. All divisions (of land) shall contain the following lot design features: (f) Panhandle lots (i.e., lots for which street frontage or access width is less than the minimum required) will not be approved as part of a division unless the subdivider shows that preexisting development in the vicinity of the division or unusual topography of the division justifies a panhandle lot. Every panhandle lot which may be approved shall have frontage on either a recorded public or private street not less than thirty -five (35) feet, and the building site shall be located within two hundred (200) feet from the street frontage of such lot." 7. The topography of the Property does not justify a panhandle lot under said subdivision (f) because it is similar to the topography of lots in the area which are not panhandle lots, and the Property has no distinguishing characteristics requiring panhandle configuration in order to render the Property developable for R -1 zoning purposes. Reg.Mtg. 4/3/89 Page 5 MINUTE BOOK NO. 48 Page No. 347