AgdaPkt 2009-10-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

88 AlTACHMENT 1 Page 9 1. The map, design or improvements of the proposed subdivision as proposed with project revisions are consistent with the general or specific plans, the zoning ordinance, or subdivision improvement requirements. As revised the Vesting Tentative Map is consistent with the corresponding Planned Development Permit, Redwood City General Plan, and Zoning Ordinance. It complies with the 1990 Strategic General Plan Land Use Designation (Low Density Residential) and the Zoning Ordinance (R-1 Single Family Residential). The Project does not comply with all the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (setback, setbacks to Cordilleras Creek, etc.) but such exemptions are permitted though the Planned Development Permit discretionary review if deemed appropriate by the City Council. 2. The site is physically suited for the proposed type or density of development. The site is already used for single-family residential use and the project will conform to the density requirements. It is located in a single-family residential neighborhood. 3. The design or proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife or their habitat, or cause serious public health problems. As evaluated in the Mitigated Negative Declarationllnitial Study, and in the Responses to Comments on the MND/IS, the project would not have any significant adverse environmental impacts. 4. The design or improvements of the proposed subdivision will not conflict with essential public easements for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision unless acceptabte alternate public easements will be provided. There are currently no public easements on the site. Although there would be public utility easements recorded on the tentative map as part of the proposed project, subdivision improvements will be designed so that they will not conflict with any public easement. Furthermore, the 15 foot no-building easement along the creek TaB will allow for future maintenance and potentially could be incorporated into a public easement. 5. The reasons submitted for the granting of any exceptions applied for do comply with requirements for findings described in Section 30.69, and the tentative map is deemed not workable without the granting of such exceptions. The exception of allowing a 22 ft. one-way private street and a paved sidewalk within that street has allowed the developer to provide an alternate and superior 5