My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2020 11:08:42 AM
Creation date
9/20/2013 9:10:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
9/23/2013
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
751
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
8.A. - Page 7 <br />established, which furthers the potential for lot aggregation should someone wish to <br />build a larger residence. <br />Given the Planning Commission's approach to allow for context sensitive home sizes, <br />staff recommends denial of the Applicant's appeal, but recognizes it is within the <br />Council's discretion to consider alternatives. Should the City Council wish to allow an <br />alternative approach to calculate home sizes (i.e. a different formula) additional <br />discussion has been provided below in Appendix A. <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />1. The Council could grant the appeal of the applicant, the Laurel Way Joint <br />Venture, and reject the Planning Commission's modifications to Condition 19, thereby <br />allowing the applicant to construct larger homes consistent with the sizes requested in <br />the application and analyzed in the RFEIR. This action would still entail certification of <br />the RFEIR by Resolution (Attachment 1), and approval of the master Planned <br />Development Permit by Resolution, but Condition 19 would have to be revised. <br />2. The Council could grant the appeal of the project opponents, a community group <br />identified as Save Laurel Way ("SLW'), and reject the Planning Commission's <br />certification of the RFEIR and/or its approval of the Project on the merits. If the Council <br />agrees with SLW that the RFEIR is not adequate, it should direct City staff to revise <br />and/or recirculate the RFEIR to address any such inadequacy. If the Council agrees <br />with SLW that the Project should not be approved on the merits, it should provide City <br />staff and the applicant with appropriate direction. <br />3. The Council could deny both appeals and, by Resolution (Attachment 1), certify <br />the Revised Final EIR and, further modify Condition 19 of the master Planned <br />Development Permit to allow for alternative home sizes, based on a different <br />methodology than provided by the Planning Commission. <br />FISCAL IMPACT <br />Review of the proposed project is subject to the City's Cost Recovery System; <br />therefore, the applicant is required to cover the costs associated with the review of this <br />project and no impact will occur as a result. Should the project move forward, the <br />applicant is required to fund all physical improvements for the private roadway and <br />utilities, which must be complete under the first phase of the project before any <br />individual home may be built. <br />Upon completion of the project, individual home may require some City services such <br />as water supply, policing, and/or fire protection. Services such as these are provided <br />throughout the community, the cost of which is covered by development impact fees, <br />surface charges, property taxes, etc. It is not anticipated that this project would result in <br />any fiscal impact to the City. <br />Page 7 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.