My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
19
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
120611
>
19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2011 12:56:17 PM
Creation date
11/30/2011 4:00:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/6/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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).
View images
View plain text
the needs of low- and very-low income households) and 14 acres at 23 units per acre <br /> (meeting the needs of moderate income households). <br /> On October 14, 2011, the City received comments on the Draft Housing Element from <br /> HCD addressing several aspects of the Draft Housing Element. The majority of the letter <br /> requests additional technical information and analysis that is currently being incorporated <br /> by staff into a subsequent draft. One of the comments from the letter addresses the <br /> subject of the sites to be rezoned. Essentially, HCD is questioning the City's assumption <br /> that the rezoning of the three Hacienda sites (which the City approved in March 2011) <br /> can be counted towards fulfilling the housing needs for very-low and low- income <br /> households. Based on State housing law (Sec. 65583.2(c)(3)(b)(iv)), which allows the <br /> City to use a default density of a 30 units per acre minimum as meeting the needs for <br /> lower income households, the City allocated the 870 units (which would be developed at <br /> the minimum 30 units per acre density) equally between the low- and very-low income <br /> categories. <br /> HCD's comment requested additional analysis to demonstrate the availability of these <br /> sites to accommodate the lower-income household need, and to describe the <br /> development status of the sites, whether there are any approved or pending projects and <br /> what other conditions are known that would preclude the sites from accommodating the <br /> lower income housing need. Although not directly asserted by HCD, the implication is <br /> that as the City is now reviewing applications from BRE on two of the sites, only the <br /> income-restricted units on these sites can be counted towards the low income need as <br /> we now know that the remainder of the units on these two sites will be market rate <br /> (affordable to moderate income households). HCD's assertion that only the income- <br /> restricted units can be counted towards the low income need once a development project <br /> has been submitted for review on that site is currently under review by the City. It is <br /> staffs recommendation at this time that the City Council consider a list of sites that would <br /> include an additional 14.3 acres, over and above the 69 acres described in the Housing <br /> Element Background, or a total of approximately 84 acres. If the City Council later <br /> decides not to address HCD's assertion in this matter, it can further pare down the list of <br /> sites prior to taking any formal action. <br /> DISCUSSION <br /> Much of the work of the Housing Element Task Force was focused on the identification of <br /> sites to accommodate the City's need for additional multifamily housing as identified in <br /> Table III-1 of the Housing Element Background. As noted, the need for additional <br /> rezoning includes 55 acres at 30 units per acre (a density appropriate to meet the low <br /> and very-low income household need) and 14 acres at 23 units/acre (a density suitable <br /> for meeting the need for moderate income households). The Task Force undertook <br /> extensive community outreach at four community meetings and provided a forum for <br /> neighborhood discussion about the sites at all nine Housing Element Task Force <br /> meetings. During this review, the Task Force considered approximately 35 sites. <br /> Through the public outreach process and evaluation of the sites using a number of site <br /> selection criteria, the list of 17 sites in Table 1 was recommended for inclusion in the draft <br /> Page 3 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.