My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2010-06-07 clds, jnt
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
AgdaPkt 2010-06-07 clds, jnt
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 4:43:56 PM
Creation date
6/3/2010 3:07:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
6/7/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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
<br />7A <br />Page 97 <br /> <br />Page 25: lIAs such, City Staff has made an interpretation for density limits on larger lots in the R2 zone, <br />consistent with densities found throughout this zone and related to the density Implied in the zoning <br />code as it Is written, but n()t specifically stated for larger properties." <br /> <br />This Is a misleading statement. The Initial Study should Inform the public that the legality of City's <br />interpretation has been challenged and may not be legal. <br /> <br />This is a false statement. There is no implied density in the Zoning Ordinance as detailed in the NO <br />IMPLIED DENSITY section. <br /> <br />Page 25: "In order to provide clarity on this practice, the Oty will revise the Zoning Ordinance to codify <br />this Interpretation." <br /> <br />This isa false statement. No clarification Is required as documented in the ILLEGAL PASr pRACTICE <br />section. <br /> <br />This 15 a misleading statement. The Initial Study should Inform the public that the legality of Ctty's <br />interpretation has been challenged and may not be legal. <br /> <br />Page 25': "Revise the Zoning Ordinance to codify the Oty's interpretation of density in the R2 zone." <br /> <br />This is a misleading statement. The Initial Study should inform th'e public that the legality of City's <br />interpretation has been challenged and may not be legal. <br /> <br />Page 25: IlClarify density limit-of up to approximately 13 to 16 units per acre and list appropriate <br />development standards consistent with the R2 lone." <br /> <br />This is a false statement. As detailed in the ILLEGAL PAST PRACTICE section, the Zoning Ordinance <br />specifies density and minimum lot area standards for all lot sizes and an permitted uses. Therefore, the <br />proposed revision does not "clarify", it is modifying. <br /> <br />This is a misleading statement. The upper limit of 16 units per acre is inconsIstent with the maximum <br />density specified on page 24, where it clearly states the maximum density is 17.4 units per acre. <br /> <br />Page 25: urhe intent of the code amendment is to clarify the lot area required for each increment <br />exceedlng 10,000 square feet and does not represent a change in land use". <br /> <br />This is 8 false statement. As detailed in the ILLEGAL PAST PRACTICE $ection, the Zoning Ordinante <br />specifies density and minimum fot area standards for all lot sizes and all permitted uses. Therefore, the <br />proposed revision does not Hdarify", it is modIfying. The permitted uses are being modified to include <br />condos, ap~rtments and duets. <br /> <br />23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.