Laserfiche WebLink
Page 11 of 12 <br />of private, public and social sector collaboration that Redwood City has become known for and which exemplifies <br />great cross-sector problem solving. <br /> <br />Parking <br />State density bonus law prevents cities from requiring in excess of 0.5sp/unit for 100% affordable project within <br />½-mile of transit such as Parcel F. Applicant is requesting a concession allowed under the State density bonus law <br />to further reduce the parking ratio to 12 spaces or 0.3sp/unit. Extremely low and very low-income tenants in <br />buildings close to transit and services often opt not to incur the expense of a car. Tenants at or below 50% AMI <br />who may also have disabilities are even less likely to own a vehicle. In developments owned by the Mental Health <br />Association of San Mateo County (MHA), even when accounting for two staff parking spaces, their parking <br />utilization rates average 0.3 per unit. Similarly, before entitling a project similar to Parcel F, the of City of Mountain <br />View conducted a parking study of other inclusive housing projects for people with developmental disabilities. <br />Based on that parking study, the City entitled a project called 1585 Studios, with no resident parking. This project <br />opened in July 2015. Since its opening, it has not experienced a parking shortage at any time of night or day. <br /> <br />Additionally, in October of 2018, the American Planning Association published an article entitled “People Over <br />Parking.” It showcased communities around the Country that have reduced or eliminated parking requirements <br />for affordable housing developments recognizing that parking requirements add unnecessary cost to a project <br />which has negative impacts on the affordability levels of the units built. It also highlighted the shift in <br />transportation preferences away from cars when rail transit is an option as it is at 1304 El Camino. <br /> <br />Cities including Minneapolis, Buffalo, Hartford, Lexington, Spokane, Seattle New York, Santa Monica, and Portland <br />were all cited for their elimination of all parking requirements in affordable housing developments. As the APA <br />article showcases, our evolving understanding of urban lifestyles coupled with a better understanding of the needs <br />of low-income tenants in affordable housing complexes is leading to revisions in outdated parking ratios around <br />the country. <br /> <br />These examples illustrate that the inclusion of tenants that are also clients of MHA and Housing Choices in the <br />project would easily facilitate a reduction of parking requirements especially if it allows for an optimal amount of <br />tenant living and community space. <br /> <br /> <br />As noted, Applicant is not proposing any changes to Parcel F and is referencing the original figures and tables from <br />the original entitlements. See below the unit mix that was delivered on Parcel F. <br /> <br /> <br />8.B. - Page 45 of 120 <br />208