AgdaPkt 2018-11-19 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

R 2 Housing needs require to go beyond "our quaint neighborhood" perspective. Ideally, before destroying consistently pretty neighborhoods, planning should look at rezoning and reusing parking lots and the like for more built-up housing plus garages +3 1 redwood City already doesn't allow enough single family homes to be built, instead relying on massive unpleasant condo developments from builders who only make luxury housing. The single family home market doesn't need any more restrictions. RWC neighborhoods already basically don't exist. There's no "character" to preserve. +3 1. We need more housing desperately. It is a crisis. +3 1 This would be another ridiculous government over reach. Large, rebuilt homes add to everyone's property values. I would much rather be surrounded by these McMansions than by the slums of condemned, falling down buildings. +2 1 Build multi -family homes LW 1 property owners should not be constrained. Property owners will take their investment and go elsewhere if RWC does this. Not good for RWC if investment avenue is to leave city. +2 1. Although some McMansions aren't pretty, we have a major housing crisis. The more people we can get housed the better. It's the Bay Area. We won't be able to stay a quaint little town forever and the lack of housing is a much larger problem than cuteness. +2 1 We need to build more housing to address the housing crisis. aesthetics are secondary! +2 1. 1 think homeowners should be able to build a second story if they want one, as long as the architecture is not way out of character and the setbacks are observed. I think RWC already has setback rules? Neighborhoods will change over time. That's mostly a good thing. Let's not get petty. +2 2 1 don't like McMansions, but I also don't like NIMBYism. Our communities have to get more dense - we really don't have a choice. +21 1 we need more rooms! Even 2 stories is not enough imo