AgdaPkt 2020-02-24 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 34 of 41 Broadway Plaza 420,000 SF Office + 2,800 new jobs = need for 1,867 units = shortfall of 1,347 res. units 26,000 SF Retail + 520 Residential Units 1180 Main Street 109,375 SF Office + 729 new jobs = need for 486 units = shortfall of 476 units 10 Residential Units Other sizable office projects 4 (with no housing included), (not specifically listed above) will add an additional 2,551,000 SF Office = estimated 17,000 new jobs = need for 11,333 housing units = shortfall of 11,333 units Currently, there are only about 1,600 new housing units either approved or in the pipelines. Clearly, there is a definite trend here. Just the current proposed office developments could result in a housing shortfall of 20.043 units. Redwood City does not have anything close to that capacity under construction or in the pipeline to date, nor do any of the nearby cities. Where do these developers expect these new employees to live? And how many people will be displaced because these additional jobs will increase local housing demand which will encourage landlords to raise rents on existing housing? This will lead to more in and out commuting which will add to increased traffic congestion, more air and water pollution, and greater GHG emissions. Redwood City, and all the cities in the county should require the developer of any new commercial Project, that will create more than 50 jobs, to lay out a feasible plan, in concert with the city planning department and city council, indicating where the new employees are expected to live. If the proposal does not include a workable solution to employee housing, the developer should be asked to resubmit a plan that will include housing that is transit oriented and not add to the regional housing shortage. We recognize that Redwood City has recently revised an existing mixed-use/live-work district zoning to allow higher -density mixed-use and stand-alone higher density multi -family housing where suitable, but the proposed changes fall far short of the 60 units per acre with community benefits (including strong incentives for affordable housing) that we have advocated in the past. We further understand the city is considering launching a Transit District stud v within its Downtown Plan, a Community Visioning outreach process, and a Gatekeeper process to encourage more balanced overall development which we applaud, but if projects of the size and scope of "Sequoia Station", and the other projects listed above, are approved before this is completed, it will seriously undermine the city's current jobs/housing balance. Sequoia Station and all the projects listed above are woefully under -housed and will add to the regional jobs -housing imbalance without a more responsible plan. We believe, because of this serious shortcoming, approval of the Sequoia Station General plan Amendment should be delayed until the Transit District Plan and related Visioning and Gatekeeper processes are completed, and until the Sequoia Station proposal is redesigned with a better balance of jobs to housing. Respectfully submitted: 3921 East Bayshore Road, Suite 204 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650-390-8411 Page 2 of 3 228