Laserfiche WebLink
4 . .. <br /> further that the people when they annexed came into the City as is and the City should <br /> go along with them. Mr. Robert Dell'Ergo, Attorney representing the adjoining prop- <br /> erty owners, Mr. and Mrs. Nappi, stated that in his opinion these two pieces of <br /> property should be considered as one. He stated why this area should be considered <br /> for commercial purposes and urged the granting of this application. Mr. Alice Rankine, <br /> President of the Green Knolls Improvement Club, stated that her Club represented <br /> approximately 90% of the people living in the area in question. Mrs. Rankine stated <br /> further that on July 12th they had presented a petition to the Planning Commission in <br /> opposition to any spot rezoning. Mr. Rankine presented to the Council a like petition <br /> with 158 signatures wherein they protested the rezoning for the following reasons: <br /> 1. It will not be in the best interest of the community, and especially <br /> of the residents of the surrounding area. <br /> 2. It is spot rezoning, therefore, contiguous properties can ask for - <br /> commercial zoning. <br /> • <br /> 3. It will lead an additional requests for spot zoning all over Redwood <br /> City. <br /> 4. The ultimate result will be to further decentralize commercial areas, <br /> to the detriment of the Dountown Business District, and at the same <br /> time,.further enroach on existing residential properties. <br /> These same people protested this rezoning as far back as April 13, 1954 when the <br /> property was rezoned from U to R -3. <br /> Mrs. Vera Eskin spoke a <br /> t some length regarding then rese <br /> P g g g p nt status of commercial ven- <br /> tures on Woodside Road, and asked Council to uphold the Planning Commission's <br /> recommendation to deny rezoning of this property. Mrs. Mary E. Joy, 1931 Woodside <br /> Rd.:_ Col. Simmons, 2175 Ward Way: Mrs. Dorothy M. Lobernik, 154 Santiago Avenue. <br /> all sopke in protest of the rezoning. <br /> Mr. Wagstaffe presented 'a petition with 24 names, all within the 300' radius, in <br /> which the above property owners requested the Council to approve the proposed change <br /> of zone applicable to said property to C -1 -H to enable the Standard Oil Company of <br /> California to erect and an automobile service station thereon. This <br /> request,was signed upon the understanding and agreement that the tavern at present <br /> upon said property be closed and the operation thereof discontinued. Mr. Wagstaffe <br /> again presented his clients' side of the story and stated that they would ask for a <br /> rezoning back to R -3 if the Council granted the present rezoning long enough to build <br /> the proposed service station. Mr. Tom Tuite, Jr., representing a group of the down <br /> town business section, spoke against any outlying zoning for commercial use, stating <br /> it was hurting the down town business. <br /> After further discussion, Councilman Britschgi moved public hearing be closed, <br /> seconded by Councilman Jones and carried. Councilman Granger moved recommendation of <br /> the Planning Commission to deny be upheld, seconded by Councilman Britschgi and <br /> carried on roll call, Councilman Spillers noted absent. <br /> PUBLIC HEARING, APPLICATION NAPPI, GILBERT AND DAHLMAN REZONE FIVE LOTS FACING WOODSIDE <br /> ROAD NORTH OF McTEAGUE PROPERTY, R -3 TO C -1 -H. .Planning Commission recommended <br /> denial. Affidavit of publication ordered filed. Councilman Britschgi asked that in <br /> fairness to the people present and the amount of hearings still to be heard, that all <br /> those who spoke in regard to the public hearing of Peter McTeague's application to <br /> rezone be asked not to speak at this public hearing as the Council was aware of their <br /> feelings in the matter. <br />