My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
CC Min 1991-10-21
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
CC Min 1991-10-21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2005 2:50:24 PM
Creation date
8/27/2004 8:57:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Date
10/21/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 />Councilman Murray advised this statement was untrue, and that density is not <br />the major constraint, value of the land is the major constraint. <br /> <br />City Manager Smith advised that per unit cost is a factor, but that the <br />words constraint and barrier are not necessarily negative terms, nor are <br />they necessarily concepts to be changed. City Manager Smith also advised <br />that value judgments weren't necessary at this point, but identification of <br />barriers or limitations of any kind should be identified along with their <br />mitigations. In response to Council questions, City Manager Smith advised <br />the Redwood City Zoning Policy was not a barrier to affordable housing. <br /> <br />M/S: Murray/Greenalch that the first item under Zoning on Page 2.31 now <br />read, II Land in Redwood City is relatively low density; the maximum allowed <br />is 36 units per acre. This is a limitation on the ability to build <br />affordable housing". <br /> <br />Carried by the following roll call vote: <br />AYES: Council Members Buchan, Claire, Greenalch, Murray, Stangel and <br />Mayor La Berge <br />NOES: Councilman Bury <br /> <br />MINUTE ORDER NO. 91-214 <br /> <br />In response to Council questions, Charles Jany, Senior Planner, advised that <br />Planned Development permits allow flexibility only, and are not an avenue <br />towards increased densities. <br /> <br />CONSENSUS: It was determined by Mayor La Berge that Council would discuss <br />fully and then consider each mitigation, in numerical order, listed in the <br />report by the Community Development Director of October 16, and each <br />barrier listed in the CHAS Draft Report as necessary. <br /> <br />MEMO 10/22/91 <br /> <br />CDD Draft Mitigation Report, Item No.1 <br /> <br />M/S: Greenalch/Bury to accept No.1, IIUse Redevelopment bond funds and <br />other funding sources, as available, to buy down land cost for affordable <br />housing projectsll as a mitigating measure addressing the barrier for land <br />cost <br /> <br />Motion carried by unanimous voice vote. <br /> <br />MINUTE ORDER NO. 91-215 <br /> <br />CDD Draft Mitigation Report, Item No.2 <br /> <br />MIS: MurraylClaire to delete Item No.2, IIAmend the Density Bonus Ordinance <br />to require all residential projects have 5 or more units to include bonus <br />unitsll <br /> <br />In response to Council questions, Housing Director Church advised this <br />mitigation would not offer developers a choice. <br /> <br />Motion carried by unanimous voice vote. <br /> <br />MINUTE ORDER NO. 91-216 <br /> <br />Regular Agenda Minutes <br />October 21, 1991 <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />MINUTE BOOK NO. 50 <br />Page No. 379 <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.