AgdaPkt 2012-09-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 463 do not contribute to the overall character of the street. This is demonstrated by the Finget Farmha�se at 90 Finger Avenue which is not visible from the street, and so its architectural qualities,massing, height,etc, cannot be observed fram the street and make no contribution to neighborhood character, and by the current house at 50 Finger Avenue,which is setback over 200 feet from the street, and therefore its features make virtually no impression on the Finger Avenue streetscape and neighborhood character. These two existing examples demonstrate that the size, lot caverage, style, massing, etc. of homes that are nQt part of tha Finger Avenue streetscape da nat contribute to neighborhood character as viewed from Finger A�venue, and so it is reasonable to conclude(as supported by the visual simulations provided by the commentor),that the new homes internal to the project that will be substantially setback and screened by �xisting homes or new homes on Lots 7 and 8 will not negativel�affect tha naighborhood's character in#hat they won't substantially cantribute ta it. The primary contribution of the project to the existing neighborhood character will be t�e introduction of two n�w harrzes facing Finger Avenue on Lots 7 anc� 8, as depicted and discussed in detail in the Draft EIR. COMMENT: This comment concerns FEIR CommentlResponse J-30 in�olving the commentor's aesthetics concerns with units internal to the project itsetf. RESPONSE: FEIR Aesponse J-30, and the response above immediately preceding this response, adequately con�ey the Draft�IR's approach to consider impacts on existing views rather than future internal project views. COMMENT: This comment concerns FEIR Comment/Response J-32 involving the appearance and compatibi�ity of new homes on�,ots 7 and 8. RESPONSE: The information and analysis presented in the Draf�EIR that is the subject of Draft EIR Comtt�ent J-32, as wel� as th� information provided in Response J-32 af the First Amendment/Final EIR, are accurate. The Draft EIR discloses the currant one-story 88 Finger Avenue home wauld be replaced with a new two story home on Lot 8 of larger mass and reduced setback, and that the 80 Finger Avenue home, while two stories and similar width, is setback a substantial distance and screened by dense, mature landscaping, such that the new hame�proposed on Lot 7 wauld have a much stronger presence facing Finger A�enue, discussed Draft E1R pgs. 114-115. The visual simulations of homes on Lot 7 and 8 provided by the commentor do not demons#rate any substantial incompatibility, rather they rainforce what has been conveyed in the figures provided in the Draft EIR(albeit in a more crude manner given the homes are not presented with any detailing to convey their actual visual interest and character). COMMENT: This comment concerns FETR Comment/Response J-33 involving]ot densities. RESPONSE: As stated in FEIR Response 7-33, proposed tot sizes for Lot 7 and S(each 6,000 sq.ft.)are in keeping with the lots at 40 and 54 Finger Avenue. The width and size of these lots facing Finger Avenue will be in character with these two adjacent lots, and the lots on tha south side af Finger Avenue opposite the project,a numbar of which are narrow and/ar smaller than these tvvo proposed lots. COMMENT: This comment concerns FEIR Comments/Responses J-37 and J-38 involving streetscape aiterations resulting from intraaucing the priva#e street entrance and exit at Finger Avenue and private roadway signage. Finger Avenue Nine-L.ot Planned Development Project 9 Responses to FEIR Corr�ments Ciky of Redwood City dUne 2d12