My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
100113
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2013 12:00:44 PM
Creation date
9/25/2013 12:00:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/1/2013
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.
/
12
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
He reviewed the project's generous landscape plan, which includes more than 1,200 trees. He <br /> presented several photo simulations depicting how the project might look from 1-680 with 5 and 10 year <br /> growth on the proposed plantings. He noted that in addition to providing more trees, the project's other <br /> benefit over the alternative office development is that the actual structures themselves are not as tall, <br /> are more in line with the surrounding area, and the existing views of the ridge are preserved. <br /> Assistant City Manager Bocian presented the Affordable Housing Agreement, which staff developed <br /> consistent with the Council's direction regarding flexibility and creativity in meeting the requirements of <br /> the city's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO). He noted that staff focused on achieving as much <br /> affordability as possible in the rental units as compared to the ownership units and that it has not been <br /> the city's practice to aggressively pursue an increase in the stock of affordable ownership homes. As is <br /> consistent with the IZO, 15% of the rental units will be made available to low and very low income <br /> families whereas the ownership units will pay a lower income housing fee. While the total fee amount of <br /> $519,532 is approximately half of what the typical fee would be ($10,713 per unit), staff feels it is a <br /> reasonable tradeoff for acquiring a significant number of low and very low income rental units. The <br /> terms of the agreement are very similar to what has recently been approved by the Council and include <br /> stipulations that the units remain affordable in perpetuity, the project will provide disabled accessible <br /> units, the property manager accepts Section 8 rental vouchers, the project is subject to the city's <br /> preference system, and that qualification for the units is based on household income. Again consistent <br /> with the Council's recent action and staff's practice for a number of years, the agreement differs from <br /> the IZO in that it bases a 3-bedroom unit on a 5 person household rather than a 4 person household. <br /> The proposed Affordable Housing Agreement is largely consistent with the development standards and <br /> design guidelines. The project makes 41% of the affordable units available as 2 bedrooms, where 35% <br /> is required. It does, however, fail to technically meet the requirement for 3 bedroom units in that 3% is <br /> offered where 10% is required. Staff does feel there are a couple of overriding considerations in that the <br /> project meets the overall requirement of 45%, provides a significant number of low and very low income <br /> units, does not provide studio units, and the 1 and 3-bedroom units are available at 50% AMI. <br /> The project is also largely consistent with the IZO, if not technically then in a way that staff believes <br /> meets the spirit of the ordinance. Mr.Bocian stated that the Housing Commission reviewed and <br /> unanimously approved the Affordable Housing Agreement and recommended approval to the Council. <br /> Councilmember Brown said she was contacted by a local resident concerned that the number of <br /> apartment units provided in this project is lower than was originally anticipated, and that this would <br /> place an additional burden on the east side in developing lower income units. <br /> Mr. Fialho said that was not necessarily true, but that he could really not say until much later in the year <br /> as they start to evaluate Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocations and what accommodations <br /> will need to be made. He acknowledged that the for sale units have reduced the total number of units <br /> used in calculating affordability requirements and that, if still needed, some of those affordable units <br /> that were anticipated might need to be moved elsewhere. He did note that there is some indication that <br /> this type of housing product won't be needed in the next Housing Element and the obligation will shift <br /> more to moderate and above moderate types of housing. <br /> Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said there is a lack of entry level housing stock in Pleasanton, which admittedly <br /> means something different here than it might elsewhere. She asked but staff could not say what the <br /> cost of these more modest single-family homes might be. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that the Planning Commission reviewed and unanimously recommended approval of <br /> the item to the Council. The actions requested of the Council are to find that the addendum to the <br /> Housing Element Environmental Impact Report is an appropriate CEQA document, to make the <br /> appropriate PUD Development Plan Findings, find the project consistent with the General Plan, find that <br /> the exceptions to the Housing and Site Development Standards and Design Guidelines are acceptable, <br /> City Council Minutes Page 4 of 12 September 3, 2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.