PC 062211 - Laserfiche WebLink

additional comments Ms. Stern stated that staff also received from Becky Dennis of Citizens for a Caring Community. Ms. Stern indicated that she will discuss a few points and requested the Commission to consider referring the balance of those points back to staff to look into further and to develop some recommendations before taking the Draft to the City Council in July: Specific edits that the Commission may wish to consider, such as adding including those with special needsat the end of Goal 5. Ms. Stern noted that this could be made and would be in line with the other Goals. Prioritization of certain residential projects or inclusion of commercial development in growth management. Ms. Stern recommended that the Commission refer those suggestions to the Growth Management Subcommittee, to consider as it develops any changes to the Growth Management Ordinance. She added that this would also cover a number of the suggestions made. Increases in the percentage of units affordable to very-low- and low-income households, or increases in the Lower-Income Housing Fee as it applies to commercial projects. Ms. Stern noted that Program 16. 2 is Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO), which could conceivably look at increasing those percentages, and that Program 17.1 is to review and modify the Lower-Income Housing Fee to be consistent with the true cost of affordable housing. She added that she believes some of the points related to those issues could be addressed by the Programs already included in the Draft Housing Element. Ms. Stern recommended that the Commission refer this letter back to staff to review and analyze these suggestions and make recommendations to the City Council when it considers the Draft July. Ms. Stern concluded by stating that staff also received a letter today from East Bay Housing Organizations (EBHO) regarding several concepts that came out of a recent discussion with affordable housing providers. She noted that some concepts are somewhat complicated to discuss at this point and recommended that the Commission refer the letter back to staff for analysis and subsequent recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Blank noted that Ms. Stern mentioned that the Draft would be forwarded to the City Council and then to HCD, after which it would return to the Planning Commission. He inquired what would return to the Planning Commission. Ms. Stern explained that said the City is required to submit a draft to the HCD, who has 60 days to provide the City with comments. She stated that these comments are usually multiple pages, and while staff is hoping to hear that the City has addressed all the requirements, there will most likely be comments that need to be addressed. She noted that amendments will then need to be made to the Draft, and if these changes are substantial, staff will bring the document back to the Housing Commission and the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 22, 2011 Page 6 of 33