Res14 15336 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

03/24/2014 WHEREAS, on February 20, 2014, the "San Francisco Bay Marinas For All Inc." (Appellant) appealed the Planning Commission's approval of the Project and adoption of Resolution No. 14-02 to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the matter was duly noticed for a de novo public hearing before the City Council on March 24, 2014; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2014, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing, in accordance with all applicable requirements of the State Planning and Zoning Law and the Redwood City Zoning Ordinance, to consider the appeal of the Project, and received and considered oral and documentary evidence on the appeal and application; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the 2003 Marina Shores Village Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Addendum No. 1 to the EIR and the Revised Addendum No. 2 to the EIR in accordance with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, prior to the public hearing, City staff identified that the density proposed by the Project (for 411 residential units) exceeded the residential density allowed under the City of Redwood City General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted a revised request for the City Council to consider 402 residential units consistent with the City of Redwood City General Plan land use designation; and WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the revised request for 402 residential units in the proposed Planned Development Permit, including the requested parking modifications, Vesting Tentative Map and Condominium Permit would further the purposes of and appropriately implement the City of Redwood City General Plan, and applicable provisions of the Redwood City Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council, having independently heard, considered, and weighed all the evidence in the record, including evidence by presented by City staff, the Applicant, Appellant and members of the public, and being fully informed of the Project, the Planning Commission's decision, and the appeal, finds that Appellant has not shown, based on evidence in the record, that the Planning Commission's decision was made in error, that there was an abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission, that the Planning Commission's decision was otherwise improper, or that the City's notices, agendas, and appeal procedures were unlawful in any manner, and, in the exercise of its independent ATTY/RE50.2967/CC PETE'S HARBOR—DENYING APPEAL AND APPROVING PROJECT Reso#15336 REV:03-25-14 VR Muff#603 Page 2 of 19