12 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT higher - density housing category, the category people are more concerned about in general. Mr. Dolan stated that the City has to submit an inventory to the State documenting that the City has met its need. He indicated that at the last cycle, the City had to rezone 70 acres to get to the RHNA number, with a little cushion of about 240 units in the event the State did not feel it could support the City's inventory as presented, based on certain questions about sites. He then displayed the RHNA Low- and Very- Low - Income Capacity table, which shows the different sites and numbers for the low- and very-low- income categories. He noted that these are the numbers the Planning Commission and the City Council should look at if they want to reduce the surplus to get closer to the RHNA numbers. He stated that staffs job is to get the Housing Element certified, and he is not comfortable at this time recommending that there be any reduction because it would be too tight. He noted that the numbers are pretty close, and there is a little bit of cushion should the Council ultimately decide to reduce it. Mr. Dolan stated that the Commission would probably hear the most about the CM Capital site, as was the case in its previous meetings and in some of the public outreach meetings. He noted that there has clearly been a request by the Parkside neighbors, who were there through the approval and the evolution of the Summerhill project and ultimately got some things. He explained that the neighbors want staff and the Commission to take a really serious look at the second half of that property which is right next door and has a similar relationship to that neighborhood. He indicated that when this issue was raised, staff had some dialogue with the owners, and the last official word from the owners is that they are very interested in maintaining their current zoning and were urging the Council ultimately to not change the designation they have. He added that since that time though, staff has been made aware that there has been some dialogue among the owners of the property, which was facilitated by James Paxson of Hacienda Business Park. He noted that the City has not been involved in that dialogue and that the Commission may be hearing more tonight about how that conversation has gone. Mr. Dolan stated that one of the things that staff has heard in some of the public outreach is that the City is just approving way too much development and has gone overboard, and the City really needs to get the reins on it. He then displayed the Entitled Housing Units per Year chart to provide data as a reference point of all the housing units that have been approved every year since 2003. He noted that it was pretty slow back in 2003 with 12 units approved; also 12 units in 2004; 22 units in 2005; then 79 units in 2006; 9 units in 2007; 130 units in 2008; and 19 units in 2009. He further noted that although the Growth Management Ordinance allowed 350 units per year, the City was not getting a lot of development proposals or approved. He continued that this resulted in the City not having any housing inventory or any land zoned for residential that could be developed, and that was what the lawsuit was all about. He pointed out that once the City was basically called for that and was forced to rezone, development started to pick up; there was clearly a demand for it. He noted that in 2010, 673 units were approved, although that was not really a result of the DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 8/13/2014 Page 2 of 18