My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
18 ATTACHMENT 1-4; 6-9
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
041613
>
18 ATTACHMENT 1-4; 6-9
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2015 3:03:53 PM
Creation date
4/10/2013 3:42:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/16/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
18 ATTACHMENT 1,4,6,9
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
206
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
IZO. Ms. Belding encouraged a delay of this project until the fee nexus study is completed and <br /> new standards are in place. <br /> Chairperson Casey closed the meeting for public comment at 8:45 p.m. <br /> Chairperson Casey discussed comments made by the Commission at the February 21 meeting <br /> and reminded Commissioners that they are an advisory board to City Council who ultimately <br /> makes the policies. <br /> Commissioner Butler asked for clarification regarding zoning and meeting the zoning <br /> requirements for the property in questions. He also noted that discussions have been taking <br /> place about putting affordable units in the East Pleasanton project. Mr. Bccian provided <br /> information about the public process that has been taking place for East Pleasanton. He also <br /> provided details regarding state requirements for rezoning of properties and the City's goals for <br /> providing affordable housing for specific groups, i.e. restricted rents. He discussed the need to <br /> review the Housing Element and determining what goals are being met. <br /> Commissioner Welsh discussed the Permit Streamlining Act and its relation to the California <br /> Center proposal. Mr. Bocian noted that staff felt it was critical to have an agreement on the <br /> affordability component for this project before the development plan is reviewed by the City <br /> Council. He further discussed the implications of the Urban Habitat settlerient. <br /> Commissioner Welsh questioned whether the developer had been asked to provide any other <br /> off-site improvements. Mr. Bocian advised that staff had not spoken to them about this in <br /> relation to the affordable housing component. He further discussed the approval process for <br /> the recent BRE projects and noted that developers are required to pay specific fees to the City <br /> of Pleasanton and to the Pleasanton Unified School District. <br /> Commissioner Probed related this discussion to the preceding discussions about the HHSG <br /> grants, noting that many of the services that will be funded through the program will serve low <br /> and very low income residents while the current proposal proposed a numoer of units at 100% <br /> of AMI. <br /> Commissioner Lopez would prefer to see a deeper level of affordability in the project and <br /> echoed the concerns expressed by Commissioner Probed. <br /> Commissioner Welsh felt that funds from the LIHF should be used for low income housing. She <br /> suggested an Option 3 that would include buying down the rents for some of the units by using <br /> funds from the LIHF possibly through an annuity. Mr. Bocian provided information about similar <br /> strategies that were implemented for two recent projects and advised that this generally works <br /> when the developer pays a fee instead of providing units. <br /> Chairperson Casey felt that there is a wide range of possible options. He discussed staff's <br /> timeline for moving forward with this project and its recommendation to approve Option 2. <br /> Chairperson Casey noted that an Option 4 would be to table this project until the fee nexus <br /> study has been completed. <br /> Commissioner Probed noted that waiting until the nexus study had been completed was an idea <br /> the Commission presented at the February 21 meeting. Mr. Bocian advised that this is not a <br /> viable option at this time because of timing issues with the nexus study. Chairperson Casey <br /> discussed with Mr. Bocian the possibility of accelerating the schedule for the study. <br /> Page - 2 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.