My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso24-10 0080 PC Reso 590 Veterans & 91 Winslow Project
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Planning Commission
>
2024
>
Reso24-10 0080 PC Reso 590 Veterans & 91 Winslow Project
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2026 3:01:37 PM
Creation date
1/6/2026 3:01:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
Planning Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ATTY/RESO.0080/PC RESO 590 VETERANS & 91 WINSLOW PROJECT <br />REV: 11-14-24 JB <br />Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, 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 documents <br />and evidence in the public record for the Project. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF <br />THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br />1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein <br />by these references as if fully set forth in their entirety. <br /> <br />2. The Planning Commission, having independently heard, considered and <br />weighed all of the evidence in the record, finds that the above recitals are accurate and <br />constitute findings in this matter, and together with the staff reports, the application <br />materials, including without limitation the CEQA determination, and all other <br />documents, reports, studies, memoranda, maps, oral and written testimony, and <br />materials in the City’s file for the applications and the Project, and all adopted City <br />planning documents relating to the Project and the Property including the City’s General <br />Plan, Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance, and other applicable City laws and regulations, <br />have together served as an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings <br />and actions set forth in this Resolution. <br /> <br />3. The Planning Commission finds that the Project is exempt from the <br />requirements of CEQA per Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15332 <br />(“Class 32 Infill Exemption”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Class 32 – Infill Development <br />Projects, as further explained in the CEQA Memorandum, because: <br /> <br />a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designations and <br />all applicable general plan policies and applicable <br />zoning designations and regulations, as set forth in the staff report and its <br />attachments; and <br />b. The proposed development occurs within City limits on a project site of no <br />more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; and <br />c. The Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened <br />species; and <br />d. Approval of the Project would not result in significant effects related to traffic <br />noise, air quality, or water quality, and would address concerns related to air <br />quality, noise, or water quality; and <br />e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public <br />services. <br /> <br />4. Architectural Permit (AP2021-075): The Planning Commission is able <br />make the required findings for approval of an Architectural Permit (Zoning Ordinance <br />Section 45.4). Specifically, the Planning Commission finds that: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.