Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A <br />Page 9 <br /> <br />Develooment Permit as set forth in Article 46. and may include common areas (aDen soace and <br />private streets) as oart of the total site develooment. <br /> <br />Additional minimum building site area requirements greater than those specified in this section <br />shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Section 32.2, tlSupplementary Lot Area <br />Requirements for Sloping Sites," under the conditions therein specitied.n <br /> <br />Redwood City staff has conducted analysis of the three scenarios in terms of potential new <br />residential development on lots meeting the above-mentioned minimum lot sizes. The Redwood <br />Shores area was built out through a series of Planned Development Permits over the last 20 years) <br />some developments are located within the R-2 zoned areas, are relatively recent and include <br />common open space areas owned and maintained by homeownersl associations. Therefore, new <br />growth andlor infill development in the Redwood Shores area is not likely to occur. The R-2 zones <br />which are most likely to undergo inti" are the Redwood Oaks, Friendly Acres, and West Woodside <br />areas. The analysis identifies the parcels that are the most likely to be redeveloped and the lots <br />with the potential for multi-family development in each area based on 121500, 13,333, and 15,000 <br />square-foot minimum lot sizes. The analysis also covers smaller contiguous parcels under the <br />same ownership, which in combination meet the above-mentioned minimum lot areas. Based on <br />these criteria, parcels that do not have adequate frontage access or lot width were eliminated from <br />the analysis along with parcels that are in public use such as schools and parks. <br /> <br />According to Staffs analysis, the three alternatives presented for the Planning Commission's and <br />City Council's consideration would permit between 94 and 213 new units across all of the City's <br />existing R-2 zoning districts (this analysis' is summarized in Section IX - Land Use Planning of this <br />document). These districts are spread throughout the City and cover more than 607 acres.total. <br />The resulting increase in density from implementation of one of these alternatives would range <br />between .15 and .43 units per acre-less than half of one unit per acre overall. Under the highest <br />density alternative, the densny of new development in the R-2 zoning districts would increase over <br />time from approximately 8.30 units per acre to 8.73 units per acre. The existing General Plan <br />designation applicable to the R-2 zoning districts permits between 8 and 20 units per acre. <br />Therefore, the proposed amendment would be well within the existing General Plan density limit <br />and would not substantially increase the permitted density from that allowed under the existing <br />zoning ordinance. In addition, all development on lots larger than 10,000 square feet within the R- <br />2 district must proceed pursuant to the City's Planned Development Permit (PD Permit) procedure, <br />which is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. <br />Consequently, all development that would be permitted under any of the three alternative density <br />standards would be required to comply with CEQA requirements before it could be approved. <br /> <br />The proposed minimum lot sizes for lots greater than 10,000 square feet were selected based on <br />the City's past interpretation of the R-2 zoning district as applied to lots greater than 10,000 square <br />feet, and on the City's past implementation of the R-2 zoning ordinance provisions for lots greater <br />than 10,000 square feet. Staff has determined that the most permissive (highest density) of the <br />three alternatives analyzed, the alternative providing for one additional housing unit for each 2,500 <br />square feet of site area above 10,000 square feetl most accurately reflects the City's past practices <br />with respect to applying the existing R-2 zoning district requirements to lots greater than 10,000 <br />square feet. As a result, the highest density alternative presented to the Planning Commission and <br />City Council would, in essence, codify the City's existing practice with respect to its implementation <br />of the R-2 zoning district for lots greater than 10,000 square feet. The remaining two alternatives <br />would require larger lots, and result in lower densities in the City's R-2 zoning districts than either <br /> <br />Initial Study, R-2 Zoning District Code Amendment <br /> <br />1 3 <br />