Laserfiche WebLink
Some adopted redevelopment plans allow the redevelopment agency to adopt guidelines <br /> to ensure that the agency is meeting its affordable housing requirements. A question is whether <br /> such provisions could provide independent authority to reject a project that does not provide <br /> adequate affordable housing on site. Alternatively, a question is whether a nexus study would <br /> allow the city to charge a high enough fee to provide the required affordable housing elsewhere <br /> in the redevelopment area. <br /> Conclusion <br /> The implications of Palmer for the creation of affordable housing in the State of <br /> California may be profound. If the case is not depublished or accepted for review, it would be <br /> prudent for communities with inclusionary ordinances to amend them to avoid a facial conflict <br /> with State rent control provisions. While some of the changes suggested here may mitigate the <br /> effect of adverse court rulings, Palmer will likely require changes in affordable housing policies <br /> and practices in the State if it is not modified by the California Supreme Court. <br /> 23 <br /> 990051A1A720372.3 <br /> 8/7/2009 <br />