Laserfiche WebLink
B Sure, why not? The developers probably have the funding to easily pull this off. The only worry is that <br />they'd wrap the cost into increased rents. Rents are already so high in the area, that they might as well <br />do some good with the projected earnings instead of keeping all of the profits. If they want to make <br />RWC more populous, they'd better start planning on offering services to accommodate the new density. <br />B but only if they provide low low income units + sufficient new onsite parking <br />B. Yes to increased density, particularly near transit. We need density for many reasons, including the <br />ability to have parks and open spaces. Low-density housing leads to dreadful waste of available space, <br />urban sprawl and demands to build on parkland "because we need more housing". More housing will <br />help us solve the housing problem. There's everything to like about this. <br />B -The higher the density, the larger the community benefits. However the community benefits are in <br />addition to the affordable units portions. <br />B require additional affordable housing in each unit! <br />B .... BUT INCREASED DENSITY ONLY IF AT LEAST SO% OF PROJECT IS AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING RATES- <br />--NAMELY: THAT WOULD BE THE "COMMUNITY BENEFIT". <br />WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING MORE ACUTELY THAN WE NEED ANY OTHER COMMUNITY <br />BENEFIT ---OR WHO WILL THE PARKS, and CHILDCARE BE FOR??, if no one can afford to live here?? <br />B only if adding affordable housing. <br />B. -with substantial strings <br />be built than have more luxury condos that onlythe techie transplants can afford. <br />D) We ONLY need more affordable housing. A public park is only helpful if it's not the only place I can <br />afford to sleep in redwood city. I would rather nothing <br />B absolutely. That has not happened much, and it should have. <br />B, only if they have blended housing. Market rate with middle income an d low income blended <br />together. <br />I think B should read community benefits not pay for City Improvements <br />B there must be a financial benefit for the residents <br />