My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2015-04-13 Closed and Joint SA and PFA REVISED 04_10_2015
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
AgdaPkt 2015-04-13 Closed and Joint SA and PFA REVISED 04_10_2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2015 8:11:02 AM
Creation date
4/9/2015 4:34:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
4/13/2015
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.
/
385
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
9.A. - Page 7 <br /> issues. The analysis in Attachment 3 contains maps showing the difficulties of applying <br /> parcel-by-parcel house size limits. <br /> Reduced flexibility- Hard floor area limits reduce the flexibility of property owners to <br /> design homes for their family needs. Discussion at workshops centered on the tension <br /> between maintaining existing neighborhood character (and existing home sizes) and <br /> property owner's desire to expand. Creating a formula that sets maximum house size <br /> undermines flexibility and can create serious impacts on property owners. This also <br /> potentially conflicts with the fourth purpose statement, which supports accommodating <br /> diverse family needs and allowing reasonable home sizes. <br /> Nonconforming properties- Instituting a strict limit will create nonconforming properties. <br /> Existing homes sizes vary widely in the hillsides, ranging from the modest 1,500 square <br /> feet to much larger 4,000 or 5,000 square feet homes. To establish a limit on <br /> neighborhoods with an existing range of home sizes will create nonconformities, despite <br /> careful crafting of criteria. Nonconforming properties are allowed to remain, but any <br /> addition or expansion is prohibited. Instituting regulations with a potential to prohibit <br /> home expansion is a significant undertaking, with a high probability for property owner <br /> concern. The potential value of a floor area limit is undermined by the possible negative <br /> effects of creating nonconformities. <br /> Floor area limits do not guarantee good design, construction quality or safety- <br /> Community discussions of home compatibility focused on design and safety. While <br /> design and safety can be partially influenced by home size, a floor area limit does not <br /> directly address either issue. A small house can be designed poorly and a large house <br /> can be designed well. Individual lot characteristics such as grade variation, soils and <br /> nearby vegetation influence safety and design. There is no particular house size that is <br /> inherently safe or compatible with particular lot sizes and slopes in the hillside. <br /> Furthermore, home sizes are currently limited through lot coverage, setbacks, height <br /> and parking regulations; a Floor Area limit simply further refines these regulations. <br /> Planning Commission Recommendation <br /> The Planning Commission reviewed the draft ordinance and environmental review at <br /> their meeting of March 3, 2015. At that meeting, approximately 20 community members <br /> spoke. Many community members spoke in favor of a specific floor area limit, while <br /> several spoke of concerns with a limit. Issues included maintaining open space, slope <br /> stability, parking, and neighborhood compatibility. Commission discussion included <br /> possible floor area limit alternatives, City Council direction and General Plan policy, <br /> issues of building safety, affected properties, and public hearing thresholds. <br /> At the conclusion of the discussion, Planning Commission concurred with the staff <br /> recommendation, with an amendment to include an Architectural Permit finding for <br /> properties adjacent to creeks. <br /> GENERAL PLAN GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS <br /> The preparation of hillside regulations is generally consistent with the following General <br /> Page 7 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.