Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2002-079 N.C.S. 05/20/2002 Resolution No. 2002-079 N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, California A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA DENYING THE APPEAL OF J.C. COLORADO AND ROSAURA GONZALES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE THE REDWOOD EMPIRE SPORTSPLEX (RESA) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2530 EAST WASHINGTON, APN 136-070-031 WHEREAS, on June 12, 2001, July 24, 2001, February 26, 2002 and March 26, 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma held a public hearing to consider Marty Hronec's application for a conditional use permit for the construction and operation of a sports complex and WHEREAS, after considering the public testimony, application materials, and Initial Study, the Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the project, with the inclusion of Mitigation Measures, will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and approved the Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, on April 9, 2002, the City Clerk received a letter of appeal from The Law Offices of Elizabeth Ann Reifler representing J.C. Colorado and Rosaura Gonzales; and WHEREAS, the Petaluma City Council held a noticed public hearing on May 20, 2002 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council, based on the evidence and testimony presented for the record at the public hearing, hereby finds that the findings made by the Planning Commission listed below apply to the Redwood Empire Sportsplex Conditional Use Permit and hereby denies the appeal by The Law Offices of Elizabeth Ann Reifler representing J.C. Colorado and Rosaura Gonzales. Findings for Approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration: 1. That based upon the Initial Study, potential impacts resulting from the project have been identified. Mitigation measures have been proposed and agreed to by the applicant as a condition of project approval that will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. In addition, there is no Resolution No. ~pp~_p79 N.C.S. substantial evidence that supports a fair argument that the project, as conditioned and mitigated, would have a significant effect on the environment. 2. That the project does not have the potential to affect wildlife resources. as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either individually or cumulatively, and is exempt from Fish and Game filing fees because it is proposed on an existing developed site surrounded by development with none of the resources as defined in the Code. 3. That the project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. 4. That the Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study and considered public comments before making a recommendation on the project. 5. That a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure compliance with the adopted mitigation measures for the proposed use at this location. 6. That the record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public review at the City of Petaluma Planning Division, City Hall, ll English Street, Petaluma, California. Findings of Approval for a Conditional Use Permit: 1. That the project, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed use is allowed with the approval of a conditional use permit under Section 5-403 of the Zoning Ordinance, which includes "private recreation areas, uses and facilities of a low impact, predominantly open space nature, including, but not limited to, country clubs, swimming pools, and golf courses." 2. That the proposed use, as conditioned, will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. Traffic, noise and lighting studies assert that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. The architectural and landscaping plans will be subject to the review and approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee to ensure that the project will be aesthetically pleasing. 3. That the proposed use, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the Section 26-500, Conditional Use Permits, and with Section 20-300, Number of Parking Spaces Required, of the Zoning Ordinance. Reso. No. 2002-079 N.C.S. 4. That the proposed project has complied with the requirements of CEQA through the preparation and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project, which addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with its development, and no further environmental analysis is necessary. 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 the A proved as to Council of the ~ty of Petaluma at a (Regular) (Adjourned) (Specia~meeting ~ r on the .........20t........... day of ............ay 20......, by the following vote: City Attorney AYES: Vice Mayor Healy, O'Brien, Mayor Thompson NOES: Cader-Thompson, Maguire, Torliatt ABSENT: None ATTEST: City Cler ~ Mayor ouncil File Res. No. .:.....~~~~:~7~........N.CS.