[External Email]
[External Email]
Agenda Item 8.2, November 15, 2022
Kathryn Hedges
Mon 11/14/2022 8:11 PM
To:City Clerk <[email protected]>;District3 <[email protected]>;District1 <[email protected]>;District2 <[email protected]>;District4 <[email protected]>;District5 <[email protected]>;District 6 <[email protected]>;District7 <[email protected]>;District8 <[email protected]>;District9 <[email protected]>;District 10 <[email protected]>;The Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo <[email protected]>;[email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: Catalyze SV >;shhaccoreteam >
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers:
I am a Downtown resident, registered voter, small business owner, and tenant in affordable housing. I'm also a member of Catalyze SV and the Sacred Heart Housing Action Committee.
I support Agenda Item 8.2 because it is important to make the best use of our scarce available land to build the maximum amount of affordable housing. I am aware that neighbors to proposed projects often pressure developers to reduce the size of their projects. Although I understand it is difficult to see a neighborhood change over time from when you purchased your home there, it is undeniable that change happens anyway. It's just distributed more diffusely.
San Jose is reaping the consequences of its shortfall of affordable housing. Even though it may be easier to visualize the effects of a new tall apartment building down the street than it is to visualize the connection between "fewer affordable units" and the social effects of displacement, it is just as real. Just because the hardship falls on lower-income people doesn't mean it isn't worth preventing. Our Housing Department understands this, and the authors of the Memorandum agendizing this item.
Likewise, it is easier and more lucrative* for affordable housing developers to build lower, cheaper buildings. But they're wasting the potential for that parcel to house more people--which contradicts their stated goal of housing poor people. I don't know what the natural lifespan is for the type of buildings currently constructed, but it's unlikely that the property will be redeveloped at greater density in the forseeable future. (*Yes, I am aware that affordable housing developers are technically nonprofits. However, that doesn't stop them from paying their C-suite nicely, or so they say at industry events.) Please approve Item 8.2 to prioritize higher density projects and penalize developers who backtrack and reduce density after being put on the fast track.
Sincerely,
Kathryn Hedges
Sole Proprietor, Splendid Colors