01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Stern referred to a memo on the dais relating to several changes to Programs 9.7 and 11.1, a text amendment to Policy 35 to better reflect the recently rezoned sites, and the addition of a table. Staff recommends the Council adopt the updated Housing Element for the 2007-2014 Planning Period, with reference to the memo. Councilmember Thorne asked how farmworker housing differs from low or very low-income housing. Ms. Stern explained that while similar, HCD requires that it be addressed as a separate category. Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Carl Farrington, the Catholic Community of Pleasanton's Social Justice Committee, referenced an email he submitted to staff and said the City would gain enormously from a vigorous and sustained effort to increase the availability of affordable housing. While Pleasanton has benefited from the advantages of being of a very high median income, there are much greater benefits to be had in the future with a greater residential mix of skills and occupations. He said Pleasanton has a social responsibility to shelter its lower paid work force and that this diversity in culture, views and education will make for a more vibrant and stimulating community. Gloria Bruce, East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO), echoed Mr. Farrington's comments. The last 15 months have been a long and difficult process but one that has resulted in many positive changes supported by organizations like EBHO as well as developers. She thanked staff for their cooperation and shared her appreciation for the additional changes with respect to Program 9.7. She said the ambitious implementation schedule is what will truly determine whether the City is able to meet the terms and intent of the settlement agreement and urged the City to work closely with non-profit developers and other stakeholders throughout this process. She said her primary concern continues to be with whether the Housing Element proactively encourages, rather than precludes, 100% affordable developments. Becky Dennis said she would have preferred to see stronger policies regarding non-profit development of affordable housing and strongly encouraged the Council to give the overlay concept more serious consideration. She felt the incentives for non-profit developers were strong but noted a distinct lack of inducements for property owners to work with them. She cited Policy 37 as a major hindrance to non- profit development due to dispersal requirements. Aside from these comments, as well as those submitted in writing, she said she very much enjoyed participating in this process. Julie Testa said she remains concerned with the lack of mitigations particularly with respect to the impacts on schools. It has been difficult to witness the needs of so many stakeholders take precedence over those of existing residents who will ultimately bear the burden of this new growth. She requested clarification on what the growth management program might look like and whether it would include mitigation for these impacts. She doubted whether the community truly understood that this is only the beginning of a significant amount of new growth. Councilmember Sullivan asked staff to discuss its work with respect to the new growth management program, its schedule, and the community engagement process. City Manager Fialho explained that the Council assembled a subcommittee that worked through 2011 to research the kind of growth management policies that can be implemented at a local level. Staff will bring forward a subcommittee report at the March 20th meeting, lay out the relevant issues, and then allow the Council and public to engage in discussion on the kind of approach the community can support. Councilmember Sullivan questioned and confirmed with the City Manager that a related discussion is on the agenda for both the upcoming liaison meeting with the school district and the joint City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7 February 13, 2012