Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 284 <br /> REDE'v-Rr�szen mees <br /> From: lulie Abraham <jabrahamz4@sbcglobal.net> <br /> Sent: Monday,June 18, 2012 11:05 AM <br /> To: GRP-Planning Commissioners <br /> Cc: GRP-City Council <br /> Sub�ect: Abraham Letter#2 for Planning Commissian June 17 2012 <br /> June 17, 2012 <br /> Re Proposed Fin�er Avenue Development—Abraham Familv Letter,#2 re FE�R <br /> CH#2008 i 12100 Prepared by: City of Re@wood City June 2012 <br /> Dear Commissioner Borgens and fellow Planning Commission Members, <br /> This email is an additional commen# to the one I emailed the Plannir�g Commission earlier on Ju�e <br /> 17, one point of which requires correction and clarification regarding my comments on the Finger <br /> A�enc�e Project being ga#ed. I now understand that the development will not be gated and wish to <br /> correct that. However, it remains e�ident tl�at the design ir� its current forrn is not pedestrian friendly, <br /> nor is it designed to ir�tegrate with fhe rest o�the neighbarhood. Specifically, the design is in direct <br /> conflict with Redwood Ci#y General Plan policy goals: <br /> 1) Goal BE-1: Achie�e compfete and integrated neig�borhoods. corridors, and centers. <br /> 2} Goal BE-1.1: Main#ain and enhance the beneficial and unique character of tf�e different <br /> neighborhoods, corridors, and centers, and open spaces that define Redwood City. <br /> 3) Goal BE-1.4: Require t�at buildings and properties be desigr�ed to ensure <br /> compatibility within and prov�o�e interfaces between neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. <br /> 4} Goal BE-1.8: Require tha# new projects are integrated as seamlessly as possibi� i�to surrounding <br /> development, creating extensio�s of the urban fabric. <br /> 5) Goal BE 5.1 - related to Goaf BE-5 - retain the unique character of the Historic influence Low <br /> Density Neighborhoods (of which FingerAvenue is a part) <br /> fi) Goal BE-5.1 Require that new constructian, additions, renovations, ar�d infill development be <br /> sensiti�e to neighborhood context, historic development patterns, and building form and scale (for <br /> example, second stories, detached garages, se#backs, enhanced front entrances). <br /> We really need your help understanding how McGowar�'s F'inger A�enue Project fulfills these <br /> Redwood City G�neral Plan goafs in its current form. If i# doesn't, it's another inducement that it <br /> should not be recomme�ded for approval. <br /> Thank you for taking these additional comments into consideration. <br /> Wi#h appreciation, <br /> i <br />