Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 151 <br /> City General Plan, and is in accordance with the applicable provisions of the <br /> Redwood City Code and Redwood City Zoning Ordinance; and <br /> WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017, Dave Tanner for the Redwood Village Business <br /> Association (collectively, "Appellant") submitted an appeal of the Planning <br /> Commission's decision asserting the Commission failed to comply with CEQA and <br /> lack of substantial evidence in the record to support the required findings to grant a <br /> Conditional Use Permit required for the Project, and; <br /> WHEREAS, on September 11, 2017, the City Council conducted a duly noticed <br /> de novo public hearing, in accordance with all applicable requirements of the <br /> Redwood City Municipal Code and State Planning and Zoning Law, to consider the <br /> appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve Conditional Use Permit No. <br /> UP2014-20 and Architectural Permit No. AP2014-66, and received and considered <br /> oral and documentary evidence in favor of or opposed to the Project, and; <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed Conditional <br /> Use Permit and Architectural Permit, for a new elementary school would not be in <br /> conflict with the purpose and intent of the City of Redwood City General Plan, and <br /> is in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Redwood City Code and <br /> Redwood City Zoning Ordinance. <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE <br /> CITY OF REDWOOD CITY AS FOLLOWS: <br /> Section 1. The City Council, having independently heard, considered and <br /> weighed all the evidence in the record, including evidence presented by City staff, the <br /> Applicant, the Appellant and members of the public, and being fully informed of the <br /> Project, the Planning Commission's decision, and the appeal, finds that the Appellant <br /> has not shown, based on evidence in the record, that the Planning Commission's <br /> decision was made in error, that there was an abuse of discretion by the Planning <br /> Commission, that the Planning Commission's decision was otherwise improper, or <br /> that the City's notices, agendas, and appeal procedures were unlawful in any manner, <br /> and, in the exercise of its independent judgment, hereby denies the appeal and <br /> approves the Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Permit based on the following <br /> findings and subject to the Conditions of Approval as set forth below. This <br /> determination is based on the entire record, including without limitation the application <br /> materials, the IS/MND, the General Plan, the staff reports and attachments prepared <br /> for the Planning Commission hearing on the Project and the appeal, each of which is <br /> incorporated herein by reference and which serve as an adequate and appropriate <br /> evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution. <br /> Section 2. The City Council finds that the above recitals are accurate and <br /> constitute findings in this matter and, together with the Staff Report and the application <br /> materials, development plan, the IS/MND, and all other documents, reports, studies, <br /> memoranda, maps, oral and written testimony, and materials in the City's file for the <br /> ATTY/RESO.0085/CC RESO DENYING APPEAL AND APPROVING CUP&AP—ROCKETSHIP CHARTER SCHOOL APPEAL <br /> REV:09-03-17 VR <br /> Page 2 of 12 <br />