My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2019-02-11 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
AgdaPkt 2019-02-11 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/2/2020 10:30:18 AM
Creation date
2/7/2019 5:10:32 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
2/11/2019
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.
/
679
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
Adamantly against development of this property. <br />2. We are struggling with traffic and large population already. <br />1 oppose because The transportation infrastructure can not support more congestion. I would support if <br />class 4 bike paths, mass transit, and pedestrian access were highly improved. <br />1. We need to show development down. It's too much too fast. We don't have the housing or the <br />infrastructure to support this. We need to put a halt to development to give the city time to adjust to <br />what had already gone up and the increased people flow that has resulted. We also need to more effort <br />into affordable housing for non -corporate residents. Enough is enough. Stop the squeeze on residents <br />and the infrastructure. <br />That seems to already to be a very congested area in Redwood City. Must fix infrastructure first especially <br />on and off ramps from 101. So my answer at this point is no <br />I think we have enough offices. What we need is stuff for kids to do like a bowling alley, minuture golf <br />etc. <br />1. IThink we need more housing nog more office space. <br />1. More housing not offices <br />2: 1 can see both sides to this one but overall it seems preemptive to create such a large office space <br />without a specific company or companies to rill it, and most importantly to cause such large <br />environmental and city-wide disruption. This seems like development for developments sake rather <br />than careful city planning with a purpose. There should be great need to justify this amount of <br />displacement, and I don't see the compelling need. <br />1. Way way too much. <br />1.1 don't think the General Plan should be amended. <br />1. We should not do a General Plan Amendment for a company whose project will impact Redwood City <br />in so very many negative ways. It should not even be considered. I will lose all faith in Redwood City <br />municipal government representatives if they even approach the slimmest possibility of approving this. <br />This should be a flat NO. <br />1 Strongly Oppose!Have developer come back after hwy interchange is done!I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.