Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ATTY/RESO.0034/PC RESO 935 DURLSTON ROAD <br />REV: 05-27-21 VR <br />Page 2 of 8 <br />WHEREAS, on June 1, 2021 the Planning Commission conducted a duly-noticed <br />public hearing in accordance with all applicable requirements of State Law to review the <br />permit application and support materials; and <br /> <br /> WHERAS , on June 1, 2021, the applicant, adjacent neighbors and all other <br />interested parties were given the opportunity to participate in the public hearing through <br />oral testimony and the submittal of written comments; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, on June 1, 2021, the Planning Commission fully reviewed, <br />considered, and evaluated the staff report prepared for the Project including the <br />attachments to the staff report, oral and written public testimony, and all other <br />documents and evidence in the public record on the Project. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />OF THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br /> <br />1. The Planning Commission finds that the above recitals are accurate and <br />constitute findings in this matter, and with the staff reports, the application materials, <br />development plan, and all other documents, reports, studies, memoranda, maps, oral <br />and written testimony, and materials in the City’s file for the application and the Project, <br />and all adopted City planning documents relating to the Project and the property <br />including the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance, and other <br />applicable City laws and regulations, have together served as an adequate and <br />appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution. <br /> <br />2. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the <br />requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines per <br />Section 15301 Class 1(e) (Existing Facilities). Further, under section 15300.2(f), there <br />would be no significant adverse change to the historic resource as the architectural style <br />will be retained and the distinctive materials, features and craftsmanship that <br />characterize the property will be preserved. The Project is harmonious with the existing <br />development and will not adversely impact the character of the existing structure on <br />site. <br /> <br />3. Permit Approval Criteria. The Planning Commission is able to make the <br />required findings as outlined in the Permit Approval Criteria for historic preservation in <br />the Municipal Code Section 40.10. Specifically the Planning Commission finds that: <br /> <br />A. In the case of any property designated a historic landmark, the <br />proposed work would not detrimentally alter, destroy or adversely affect <br />any exterior architectural feature; or <br /> <br />This project includes an addition to a Historic: Non-designated home; however, the <br />historic evaluation (Attachment 3) indicates the structure is eligible for local landmark <br />designation. Therefore, the Planning Commission is asked to review the proposed