My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020
>
111720
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2020 2:40:20 PM
Creation date
11/12/2020 2:40:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/17/2020
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
Mayor Thorne requested housing-related bills be considered before all other bills and voted upon <br /> separately. <br /> Community Development Director Clark provided a brief overview of the proposed housing bills and <br /> noted they have been organized by Zoning, Density Bonus Law, California Environmental Quality Act <br /> (CEQA), Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) and the Housing Element process. She reported <br /> Senate Bill (SB) 1385 (Caballero), Assembly Bill (AB) 1279 (Bloom), AB 3107 (Bloom) have all died in <br /> committee, but staff will continue to track them in case they return. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported SB 1120 (Atkins) would allow for additional residential <br /> density within residential neighborhoods by allowing for the construction of duplexes as well as splits of <br /> single-family lots into smaller lots without the benefit of design review. She explained the staff's concern <br /> with this bill is that it introduces the densification of development in residential neighborhoods with <br /> limited City oversight and does not contain an affordability component. She reported staff recommends <br /> the City oppose the bill. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported SB 902 (Weiner) would allow for local jurisdictions to <br /> zone parcels and properties for up to 10 units of housing and the City would retain local control. She <br /> reported staff recommends the City support the bill. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported SB 899 (Wiener) would allow housing projects by <br /> right on properties owned by religious institutions or by higher education institutions that could be <br /> developed in partnership with the housing nonprofit and would have to be 100% affordable housing. <br /> She reported 80% lower-income and up to 20% of moderate-income units could be allowed. She <br /> explained the significant density increase and the lack of local control has resulted in staff <br /> recommending opposing the bill. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported both SB 1085 (Skinner) and Assembly Bill 2345 <br /> (Gonzalez) propose to expand and extend the existing provision of the Density Bonus Law. She <br /> explained those provisions increase the number of units that could be granted through density bonuses. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported SB 995 (Atkins) is a tool that would provide local <br /> jurisdictions the ability to streamline judicial review for housing projects and noted staff recommends <br /> supporting the bill. <br /> Community Development Director Clark reported AB 3040 (Chiu) is a tool for cities to count units zoned <br /> on small infill sites against the RHNA allocation and City staff recommends the City support the bill. She <br /> reported AB 725 (Wicks) proposes changes to the Housing Element process and adds an additional <br /> layer of requirements relative to moderate-income housing and the way that cities would have to zone <br /> certain properties for higher density housing to accommodate a proportion of the moderate-income <br /> need and noted staff recommends opposing the bill. <br /> Niccolo De Luca, Townsend Public Affairs, reported many of the bills have gone through many <br /> iterations with his team working on approximately 70% of the bills on behalf of the City and other Tri- <br /> Valley cities. He noted his firm was invited to be at the table by Senate Pro Tem Toni Atkins on many of <br /> the bills due to the successful advocacy day they had back in January. <br /> In response to Councilmember Pentin's earlier inquiry, Andres Ramirez, Townsend Public Affairs, <br /> explained the Appropriations Suspense File process allows for bills with a certain level of fiscal impact <br /> to be set aside by a majority of the members present and voting. He further explained the bills can be <br /> brought up at a later hearing date and the Committee Chair announces which bills have been removed <br /> from the Suspense File. He explained that, if removed, the bill moves onto the respective House's floor <br /> for a final vote before being sent to the Governor. Additionally, he explained if the bill remains in the <br /> Suspense File it will not continue forward that year. He further explained the Suspense File allows the <br /> City Council Minutes Page 8 of 14 August 18,2020 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.