|
03/11/2013
<br /> WHEREAS, the Appellants and Applicant and all other interested parties were
<br /> given the opportunity to participate in the public hearing through oral testimony and the
<br /> submittal of written comments; and
<br /> WHEREAS, on March 11, 2013, the City Council considered Addendum No. 2,
<br /> together with the 2007 EIR and Addendum No. 1 in accordance with the requirements
<br /> of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and as part of the City's
<br /> consideration of the appeals and the Expansion Project; and
<br /> WHEREAS, on March 11, 2013, the City Council fully reviewed, considered, and
<br /> evaluated the staff reports prepared for the Project including the attachments to the staff
<br /> reports, public testimony and comments, and all other documents and evidence in the
<br /> public record on the Project and the appeals; and
<br /> WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a Use Permit Modification and
<br /> new Architectural Permit for 20 fueling position gas station ("Approved Project") would
<br /> further the purposes of and appropriately implement the City of Redwood City General
<br /> Plan and applicable provisions of the Redwood City Municipal Code and Zoning
<br /> Ordinance.
<br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
<br /> OF REDWOOD CITY AS FOLLOWS:
<br /> Section 1. 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 revised
<br /> application materials, including without limitation, Addendum No.2 and the 2007 Final
<br /> Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Redwood City Costco Wholesale Project
<br /> ("2007 EIR"), development plan, and all other documents, reports, studies, memoranda,
<br /> maps, oral and written testimony, and materials in the City's file for the applications and
<br /> the Project, and all adopted City planning documents relating to the Project and the
<br /> property including the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance, and
<br /> other applicable City laws and regulations, and all associated approved and certified
<br /> environmental documents, have together served as an adequate and appropriate
<br /> evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution.
<br /> Section 2. As to Appellant's appeal of the Planning Commission Approvals,
<br /> the City Council, having independently heard, considered, and weighed all the evidence
<br /> in the record presented on behalf of all parties and being fully informed of the Project,
<br /> the Planning Commission Approvals, and the two appeals, finds that Appellant has not
<br /> shown, based on evidence in the record, that the Planning Commission Approvals were
<br /> made in error, that there was an abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission, that
<br /> the Planning Commission's decision was otherwise improper, or that the City's notices,
<br /> agendas, and appeal procedures were unlawful in any manner. Accordingly, the appeal
<br /> filed by Appellant James M. Dombroski filed an appeal of the Planning Commission
<br /> Approvals on behalf of Andy Saberi, Andy's BP, Inc. and Fifth Avenue Enterprises, Inc.,
<br /> is denied.
<br /> ATfY/RES0.2816/COSTCO RESO.#15249
<br /> REV:03-12-13 VR MUFF#603
<br /> Page 2 of 9
<br />
|