My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
090313
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2013 11:38:39 AM
Creation date
8/29/2013 11:38:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/3/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
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
Mr. Dolan stated that staff received a total of 9 emails supporting the project as well as 1 phone call and <br /> several emails expressing concerns. Staff has also provided the Council with a copy of an email from <br /> East Bay Regional Parks District. <br /> He introduced the 3 agreements associated with the application, noting that the terms of the proposed <br /> Development Agreement represent a real give and take on the part of both the city and the applicant. He <br /> highlighted several key features of the agreement, which include a vested entitlement for 10 years, the <br /> city's ability to use the project's in lieu park dedication fees towards improving city parks including Bernal <br /> Community Park, and a requirement that the applicant come forward with payment of school impact fees <br /> in accordance with an agreement between the applicant and Pleasanton Unified School District. <br /> Assistant City Manager Bocian presented an overview of the Affordable Housing Agreement (AHA), <br /> explaining that any develop in excess of 15 units per acre is subject to the city's Inclusionary Zoning <br /> Ordinance and required to make 15% of total units affordable to low and very low income households. <br /> The IZO requires a total of 52 affordable units for the proposed project. At its workshop with the Housing <br /> Commission, the Council also directed staff to be flexible and creative in terms of trying to reach an <br /> agreement that honors the spirit of the IZO and meets the developer's needs in the context of the <br /> current legal environment. Staff created a unit mix that meets the total unit requirement, 10 of which <br /> would be made available to very low income, 17 to low income and 25 to median income households. <br /> While this mix offers roughly half of the affordable units to median income households, the Council may <br /> recall that it is essentially identical to what was approved for the California Center project. <br /> The proposed AHA is consistent with the city's standard format and also addresses several concerns <br /> raised by the Council relative to the St. Anton project. The agreement therefore includes specific <br /> requirements relative to some of the improvements to those units that are m ade accessible to the <br /> physically disabled. The agreement requires that accessible units remain on the market for a period of <br /> 21 days, where in the past the requirement was 10 days, before being made available to market rate <br /> tenants. The agreement also contains specific language requiring that the property manager make <br /> attempts to relocate non-disabled tenants residing in accessible units should the need to accommodate <br /> a physically disabled tenant arise. As with other agreements, the proposed AHA requires acceptance of <br /> Section 8 vouchers for eligible qualified applicants, is recorded with the land, is subject to the city's <br /> preference system and links rents to household size. <br /> This particular agreement also includes an option, to be exercised at the City's discretion, for the <br /> applicant to pay a $4.5 million fee in lieu of providing any rent restricted units withi i the development. He <br /> noted that if the Lower Income Housing Fee were to be amended between now and occupancy of the <br /> project and if it were to result in a fee greater than this, this proposed fee prevails. Current fees for <br /> multifamily development would yield a fee of approximately $1 million, $3.4 million less than staff was <br /> able to negotiate with the applicant. <br /> As indicated in the AHA, the City must indicate its preference within 45 days from the time the developer <br /> notifies the city of its intent to begin construction or within 1 year of the effective date of the agreement. <br /> Staff's intent is to report back to the Council sometime after the effective date of the agreement with its <br /> recommendation and for the Council to discuss appropriation of the funding if the fee option is selected. <br /> While lower income housing in lieu fees have historically been placed in the city's Lower Income <br /> Housing Fund, staff feels that the portion in excess of the standard fee may be used for something other <br /> than is specifically identified in the fee ordinance. Staff is also interested to see what occurs with another <br /> high density development currently working its way through the process before making a <br /> recommendation on what would yield the greatest overall level of affordability. <br /> Mr. Bocian provided a slide demonstrating the project's compliance with the IZO. He noted that it fails to <br /> meet requirements regarding depth of affordability and unit mix. He explained that while the IZO <br /> considers 3 bed units to accommodate a household of 4, staff has historically associated 3 bed units <br /> City Council Minutes Page 3 of 10 August 6,2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.