My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2014
>
090214
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2015 4:56:24 PM
Creation date
8/27/2014 5:05:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/2/2014
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
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
Pleasanton Housing Element Stakeholder Meetings <br />Question *a: Weaknesses/Needs <br />• Which segments of the population are most underserved by housing - related resources? <br />• Are new housing - related needs emerging in the community? <br />• What issues have you incurred with developing housing in Pleasanton? <br />Responses: <br />• Harder to borrow money <br />• High impact and City fees <br />• so% of AMI Alameda County (too high of a subsidy for this income group) <br />• Fees can end up being higher than land values <br />• Higher impact fees than surrounding areas <br />• All cash buyers push out typical home buyers in todays market <br />• PD Zoning and GP zoning creates uncertainty in housing development regulations <br />• Prevailing wage is required when utilizing government funding <br />• Lack of perceived support for affordable by design units <br />• Need concurrent permit processing for PUD's and Tract Maps <br />• City listens to the few neighborhood objections over greater support. <br />Question #g: Opportunities <br />• How can the community improve on and grow existing resources and work better with <br />the development community? <br />• What housing types and programs should we be looking to add? <br />• Are there specific policies or actions that the city should consider including in the <br />Housing Element to improve access and/or opportunities? <br />Responses: <br />• Class A, LEED Certified, Tax Credit for everyone <br />• Programs to defer fees <br />• Change in community/ political will <br />• Greater use of CDBG/ Home funds <br />• More in -lieu fees to be dedicated to housing <br />• More affordable rental housing rather than ownership <br />• Programs for for -profit developers to pay fee / give land to non -profits <br />• Ongoing effort at state level for affordable housing <br />• Add Habitat for Humanity housing type developments <br />• Know your workforce (what they can afford) <br />• More ownership affordable <br />Conclusion <br />The stakeholder group at this meeting varied widely from developers who have built housing in <br />Pleasanton, developers who would like to pursue housing projects in the City, interested <br />residents and affordable housing advocates. The consensus from this meeting was that <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.