My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2021.01.25 Amended Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2021
>
AgdaPkt 2021.01.25 Amended Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2021 11:43:36 AM
Creation date
1/22/2021 5:57:22 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
1/25/2021
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.
/
385
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
From: - <br />To: GRP -City Council <br />Subject: Comments on Transit District Project <br />Date: Monday, January 25, 2021 10:52:39 PM <br />CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when <br />opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. <br />Dear Council Members, <br />I wanted to share the full text of my comments on the Transit District Project, so I am sharing <br />it below. Thank you for your consideration. <br />Best Wishes, <br />Kate Hiester <br />HHCC <br />Good evening Council Members, City Staff, and members of the public. Thank you for this <br />opportunity to speak. My name is Kate Hiester and I am a resident of the Central <br />neighborhood as well as the Vice Chair of Redwood City's Housing and Human Concerns <br />Committee. I want to note that I am here as an individual and am not speaking on behalf of <br />the Committee. <br />Broadly speaking, I am excited about the transit district project and the direction it is starting <br />to take with these new revisions to the Sequoia Center plan. I encourage the Council to <br />continue to forefront high-quality, affordable housing as a central consideration in this <br />project. Along those lines, I hope to point out a few questions and comments that I hope the <br />Council will seek to address: <br />2. <br />It appears that at least some of the public materials have mislabeled units in the <br />Block A as including some "Missing Middle / Moderate" units. These units are <br />identified as for residents with 120-200% of the area mean income. Moderate income <br />is defined by HUD as up to 120% of AMI. This means that none of the units in Block <br />A, developed by Lowe, would serve our moderate and lower income households, <br />regardless of the subsidies mentioned. <br />I appreciate that the affordable housing in Block D has been incorporated into this <br />plan. I know this Council has worked hard to advance affordable housing projects <br />throughout the city and this change reflects that priority. However, I want to raise a <br />concern that all affordable units will be within one building and all market -rate units <br />will be in another. While it is certainly better for our community to have mixed -income <br />neighborhoods than segregated ones, it is similarly better to have mixed income <br />buildings rather than segregated ones. I understand there may be real challenges <br />around financing, but I encourage the Council and developers to grapple with how we <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.