Laserfiche WebLink
11 <br /> <br />Accordingly, the Project is consistent with all historic resource provisions of the DTPP, <br />including those applicable to (1) historic resources and (2) non-historic sites adjacent to <br />historic resources. <br /> <br />ii. The Project Complies with the Architectural Character Regulations <br /> <br />Appellants’ Contention: That while contemporary architecture is allowed for the Project <br />site, it is not appropriate given the proximity of the three historic resources discussed <br />earlier in this report (620 Jefferson, and 605 and 611 Middlefield); that the DTPP’s <br />prohibition of Victorian architecture in the North of Marshall District is flawed given that <br />the resource at 620 Jefferson is of a Victorian architectural style; that the Project <br />architecture is not consistent with any of the photographs in the DTPP depicting <br />“contemporary” architecture; and that the architectural character of the Project is not <br />compatible with “the established patterns in the various parts of downtown.” (See Carr, <br />Yeley and Associates Appeal, pp. 3-7) <br /> <br />City’s Response: As noted earlier in this report, the North of Marshall Architectural <br />Character District in which the Project site is located has an architectural character <br />incorporating materials and imagery of contemporary design, and that no particular style <br />is dominant. Historic pre-World War II styles have very little representation in the North <br />of Marshall District, and as such the DTPP allows greater flexibility here than it does in <br />other places because compatibility isn’t as significant of an issue as it is elsewhere in <br />the Downtown. <br /> <br />For the North of Marshall district, in which the Project site is located, Neoclassical, <br />Craftsman, Mediterranean, Art Deco and Contemporary architectural styles are <br />permitted. In fact, as noted by the Appellant (see Carr, Yeley and Associates Appeal, <br />p. 7), the only architectural style not permitted in this area is Victorian. In other words, <br />the North of Marshall District is the least restrictive of all downtown districts in terms of <br />architectural style and character. The DTPP expressly states that the architectural <br />character regulations “will not dictate style, but will add final design touches to buildings <br />in order to give them a character that may be unique but complimentary with the <br />architecture of Downtown Redwood City.” (DTPP, p. 26) <br /> <br />For the Contemporary architectural style, the regulations that add those “final design <br />touches” allow for a variety of roof forms, including flat or shaped roofs, and a variety of <br />wall cladding materials that includes stucco, metal and glass (so long as the glass does <br />not exceed the allowed glazing limits set forth in Section 2.8 of the DTPP). The DTPP <br />states that the Contemporary Architectural Character Type guidelines “draw upon <br />contemporary building materials, modern construction methods, and simple geometric <br />8.C. - Page 11