Laserfiche WebLink
A 3- believe they already review plans and do not allow for most the lot to be covered with <br />McMansion (Unlike San Carlos). Not opposed to 2 story houses there are many in the <br />neighborhood that have been here for more than 60 years <br />+7 3 1 feel neutral on this. I live in an apartment building and the single story character of <br />neighborhoods elsewhere in Redwood City does not affect me <br />3 not really sure current planning requirements don't properly manage this. <br />Historic preservation is a factor here. if a home is an historic resource with character defining <br />features or if it is in an historic district then its character defining features need to be <br />preserved. Generally, I am in favor of allowing additional stories and high density near transit. <br />But the issue in Mt Carmel is more complex. Cannot give a number. <br />3 with some limits not including nude sunbathers rights <br />3. 1 see both sides of this issue. <br />3 The reason I put 3 is that I DO think we should have rules like Palo Alto and Burlingame <br />have on square footage to lot size ratios, buy I absolutely think that banning two story <br />structures or a historic district would be bad ways of accomplishing. Id also like to see some <br />design standards that would ensure quality development without enshrining a particular <br />style like Tudor or Cape Cod or Craftsman as required <br />3.1 need to know what the new restrictions are. <br />3 RWC should enact arch quidelines that focus on quality, not size restrictions per se. Quality <br />would include 2nd floor articulation, setbacks and application of consistent detailing around <br />all four sides. Restrictions based on single story character of neighborhoods has no merit. <br />3. Depends on location and zoning. <br />31 can see both sides of the argument. My parents had their neighbors build a second story <br />next door and it reduced their natural light a little bit. Thank <br />