HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions 89-265 N.C.S. 08/21/1989~;
-E F~eS®lutl®n No. 89-265 N.C.S.
-~ of the City of Petaluma, California
RESOLUTION UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE A REQUESTED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT.,
REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
BAYWOOD VIT_.LAGF. SHOPPING CENTER
WHEREAS, Warren Owens of Developed Financial Resources requested
approval of a General Plan amendment to Thoroughfare Commercial, a
rezoning to C-H (Highway Commercial, and a conditional use permit to allow
the Baywood Village Shopping Center at Lakeville Highway and Baywood
Drive, Sonoma County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 005-060-36 and
005-201-01; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the application during public
hearings on April 25th and May 23rd, 1989 at which time the General Plan
amendment, rezoning and conditional use permit were denied without
prejudice based on specific findings; and,
WHEREAS, the application was considered by the City Council on July 17,
1989 prior to the Council rendering its decision;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds as follows:
(General Plan Amendment )
1. The property owner of AP Number 005-201-01 has withdrawn his
consent allowing the project proponent to act as his agent in filing for
said General Plan Amendment.
2. As the project proposal will require substantial design change in
response to mitigations recommended in the EIR, approval of a General
Plan Amendment for the site is premature .
89-265
Res. No . .............................. N.C.S.
;;r
,~
~~
(Rezoning )
3. The property owner of AP Number 005-201-O1 has withdrawn his
consent allowing the project proponent to act as his agent in filing for
said rezoning.
4. The proposed rezoning is not consistent with the General Plan.
5. As the project proposal will require substantial design change in
response to mitigations recommended in the EIR, approval of a
rezoning is premature.
(Use Permit)
6. The proposed use is not consistent with the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance
or the Petaluma General Plan .
7. Mitigation measures recommended in the EIR will require substantial
redesign of the project to the degree that the mitigated design of the
project cannot be adequately evaluated at this time.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Petaluma
upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies without
prejudice the General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Conditional Use
Permit.
reso.baywood.denial / resoll
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by th~-r-:-.d~~Fa.~eo
Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (~Q-~gi~etisl~~»oiad) megting
on the ...........21st..... day of ................. Augus t.........................., 19..89., by the --. .
following vote:
i y Attor ey
AYES: Woolsey, Cavanagh, Davis, Balshaw, Vice Mayor Sobel, Mayor Hilligoss
NC+ES: 0
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
CA 10-85
Qouacil File ....................................
Res. No. .........8.9-..2.6.Jr... N.C.S.
_ ........:....... .6~.:_....
City Clerk Mayor