Laserfiche WebLink
Therefore the figures for Redwood City should be reduced by 20% resulting <br />in 480 units with the 120 units to be built by the County. <br />M /S: Murray /Bury to adopt as a numerical objective for 1990 -95 for <br />Redwood City the figure of 480 affordable units, and encourage the County <br />of San Mateo to build 120 units to be in compliance with ABAG <br />projections. <br />h. Page G -15, No. 2 Strategy. Change wording from "require a 50 foot <br />average lot width" to either permit a 50 foot or at least a 50 foot <br />average lot width. <br />CONSENSUS: Mayor Greenalch determined it to be the consensus of the <br />Council to direct the Planning Director to make the subject change. <br />i. Page G -16, No. 4 Strategy. Change the word "select" to "recommend ". This <br />CONSENSUS: Mayor Greenalch determined it to be the consensus of the <br />Council to direct the Planning Director to make the subject change. <br />j. Page G -16, No. 5. Change wording to add "utilize all private funds ". <br />CONSENSUS: Mayor Greenalch determined it to be the consensus of the <br />Council to direct the Planning Director to make the subject change. <br />k. Page G -19, No. 16 Strategy. This ratio of the state requirement for a <br />density bonus formula for low and moderate income units would encourage <br />proliferation of units allowed as exceptions to established zoned <br />densities and there is no mechanism to monitor or enforce below market <br />rate status of units spread throughout the City. Density regulations <br />throughout the City would be sidestepped with resulting traffic problems, <br />etc., the affordable housing units would eventually disappear to reemerge <br />as market rate units, and the state requirement of 25% obviously applies <br />to larger developments which are more likely and easier to be monitored <br />for compliance. This ratio is a fundamental attack on our zoning laws. <br />M /S: Murray /La Berge that Strategy No. 16 in its present form be <br />deleted. <br />Planning Director Patterson described the state law requiring the bonus <br />for a commitment of 25% of the units as affordable housing, the need for <br />an ordinance to impose this ratio, and the expectation that nonprofit <br />organizations would monitor these units. <br />Motion failed on the following voice vote: <br />AYES: Councilman Murray <br />NOES: Councilmembers Buchan, Bury, La Berge, Stangel and Mayor <br />Greenalch <br />Reg.Mtg.Minutes <br />1/22/90 <br />MINUTE BOOK NO. 49 Page 10 <br />Page No. 201 <br />