CC Min 1988-03-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Item N0. 12 (continued) To: Iyufy enterprises 150 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Peter Uccelli I1 Uccelli Blvd. Redwood City, CA 94063 Re: FINDINGS ON APPEAL FROM DECISION OF THE 80NING ADMINISTRATOR TO GRANT A USE PERMIT FOR A 12- SCREEN INDOOR THEATRE (555 East Bayshore Rd., Redwood City) Public hearing having been duly noticed for March 7, 1988 on the abovementioned appeal, the scatter having been continued and the hearing having been opened and held on March 14, 1988, oral testimony having been beard, and documentary material having been received, opportunity to be heard having been given to all persons present, the Council of the City of Redwood City hereby finds, determines and concludes as follows: 1. The appeal was filed by Peter Uccelli ( "Appellant ") on October 14, 1987. Thereafter, on November 9, 1987 hearing was held by the City Council at which time, by notion duly made and carried, the Council determined to retain jurisdiction regarding the application for a use permit by Syufy Enterprises (the 'Permittee") with the intention of providing opportunity to allow the parties to pursue alternatives to mitigate perceived traffic problems, and to include the participation of Appellant in the process (Minute Order No. 87 -212 dated 11/10/87). 2. Such alternative mitigation measures included a proposal by Appellant that the Permittee provide vehicular access to Permittee'a proposed development of a 12- screen indoor theatre (the 'Project'), which access would lie generally along the northerly boundary of the Project site. 3. Following the November 10, 1987 hearing, Appellant did investigate the feasibility of constructing such alternate access, and commissioned and obtained preparation of a traffic study prepared by Brian, Eangas i Foulk, Engineers, dated February 22, 1988 entitled • Traffic Study of Proposed 12- Screen Theatre, Redwood City, California" which study supplements and expands upon a prior study, likewise prepared for Appellant, dated June, 1987. 4. Uncontradicted evidence established the estimated cost of construction of the alternative access at $1,219,325, excluding the costs of acquiring a right-of-way and special engineering costs associated with improvments thereof. S. If constructed, the proposed alternative access would not necessarily reduce or alleviate perceived traffic congestion at the Whipple Avenue /Bayshore Freeway (Route 101) on -ramp intersection, located northwesterly of the Project, which traffic congestion is anticipated to occur from the combination of theatre patronage and Bayshore Freeway on -ramp traffic, together with traffic proceeding to other enterprises located on East Bayshore Road and Bair Island Road, including Appellant's restaurant and yacht harbor facilities located at the terminus of the latter Road. 6. The proposed alternative access does not, by reason of the foregoing, present either a practicable solution to perceived traffic congestion which might occur from operation of the Project, nor is it economically feasible in light of the limited, or nonexistent practical benefits. Reg .Ntg. 3/21/88 Page 7 MINUTE BOOK NO. 48 Page No. 7 -a.