Laserfiche WebLink
10. <br /> <br />construction. <br /> <br />The AMM supports the basic concept of life cycle housing and <br />alternative housing types but believes some clarification should <br />be made, (see General Concerns 2 and 3). The AMM recommends <br />revising policy 10 on page 20 to reflect more of a regional <br />approach in the planning for life-cycle housing needs. <br /> <br />Handicapped - Accessible Housing. (page 21). The AMM has a <br />problem with policy 12. The policy states that funds should be <br />made available but does not state where this funding should come <br />from. The AMM believes it is the responsibility of the federal <br />and state levels of government to provide these funds because of <br />their broader tax bases. <br /> <br />The AMM has concerns with respect to policy 16 on page 25 which <br />introduces the "Community Index Concept." The committee believes <br />the Community Index might be a useful tool to serve as a guide <br />for local planning effort but believes there are too many <br />variables and unanswered questions for the Council to use this <br />index in a "policy 34" type review situation. (see General <br />Con~ern 1) <br /> <br />Recommendation: If the Council proceeds with the Community Index <br />Concept, it should be used as an advisory and experimental basis <br />initially· <br /> <br />Policy 17 on page 25. The AMM recommends tightening the wording <br />to reflect the federal definition of low income persons. <br /> <br />Policy 18 on page 26. The AMM does not object to this policy but <br />believes it mixes two different concepts into a single policy and <br />thereby possibly creating confusion. (concentration of <br />subsidized housing and the fact that design and construction for <br />subsidized housing should not be inferior to market rate <br />housing). <br /> <br />Policy 21 on page 28. The AMM concurs with this policy. <br /> <br />Policy 22. The AMM has a concern with the B. portion of this <br />policy (housing strategy for older developed suburbs) which <br />really does not define a strategy as much as it discusses tools. <br />This statement should be amplified to explain how the various <br />subsidy tools can be used to meet the needs of the lowest income <br />groups. <br /> <br />Page 34, background material relative to deteriorated <br />neighborhoods. The last sentence of the first paragraph needs to <br />be amplified to explain that "low quality service" does not refer <br />just to the services provided by the city. The AMM does not <br />agree with the implication that a city provides its services <br /> <br /> <br />