My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2018-05-21 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
AgdaPkt 2018-05-21 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/22/2018 3:10:38 PM
Creation date
5/17/2018 5:10:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
5/21/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
725
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
could add twice the units, if the requirement is financially infeasible, the resulting construction of <br />affordable units for that project is zero. It is particularly challenging for smaller projects to provide <br />larger percentages of affordable units, as cost is spread across fewer units. <br /> <br />As a general rule, 15% is a common standard for inclusionary requirements. The State Housing and <br />Community Development Department (HCD) may subject ordinances exceeding this amount with <br />respect to low-income households to additional scrutiny, to ensure the requirement does not <br />reduce overall residential construction. <br /> <br />Is reducing residential construction a bad thing? Building new luxury <br />housing makes our affordability crisis worse. <br />Building market-rate housing and office and retail can result in increased need for a low-skilled <br />workforce. However, it also provides additional housing options, reducing pressure on existing <br />housing stock, particularly naturally affordable units and neighborhoods. While many people <br />believe building more housing increases prices, research does not bear this out. A wide variety of <br />factors have influenced the housing crisis, including jobs/housing imbalance, overall lack of supply, <br />and tax policy that rewards new jobs, but not housing. Redwood City is addressing the housing <br />crisis on a variety of fronts, including increasing supply along transit corridors, creating an <br />inclusionary requirement, mandating impact fees for new construction, creating policies that <br />mitigate displacement (minimum lease terms and relocation assistance) as well as making <br />accessory dwelling units easy to build. <br /> <br />Won’t creating an expensive requirement like affordable housing increase <br />rents and prices? <br />New development is subject to market forces, which currently are pushing up rents. However, a <br />single development does not determine the market. Generally, if rents for a single project are <br />substantially above market rate, the units would not lease. Costs associated with affordable housing <br />are not generally passed on to the public since developers are cannot sell or rent for higher prices <br />than what people will pay. <br /> <br />Can we limit what concessions we allow? Wouldn’t a concession require an <br />amendment to our General Plan or Zoning Ordinance? <br />No. State density bonus law strictly limits how concessions may be denied and specifically states <br />that granted concessions are not considered “inconsistent” with zoning or general <br />plan. Concessions may only be denied if any of the following is true: (1) The granted concession <br />does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, or (2) the concessions would have a <br />specific, adverse impact on public health, safety or the physical environment or specified historic <br />resources, or (3) the concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law. <br /> <br />How can these affordable units be required? Isn’t this rent control? <br />No, this is not rent control. The state passed a law last year explicitly allowing cities to require <br />affordable units as part of residential construction. Over 880 cities across the country have an <br />inclusionary ordinance. Inclusionary housing for new development is just one of many tools that <br />are need to tackle the affordability crisis. This is one way for new development to contribute to the <br />solution, without imposing on developers the full burden of solving the housing crisis. <br />6.A. - Page 30 7.A. - Page 48
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.