My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
13A ATTACHMENTS 1-2
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
030221
>
13A ATTACHMENTS 1-2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2021 9:45:23 AM
Creation date
2/25/2021 10:09:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/2/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
13A
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\030221
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
DRAFT 2021 Recommended Positions on Bills <br /> Assembly Bill/ Summary Guiding Recommended City Position TVC League of <br /> Senate Bill Principle Position CA Cities <br /> Position <br /> SB 8 (Skinner) Would make a non-substantive Housing Watch. This is a placeholder bill None Watch <br /> Density Bonus change to the definition of proposed by Senator Skinner, and <br /> Law "development standard" for purposes is subject to revision. <br /> of the Density Bonus Law. <br /> SB 9 (Atkins) Would require a proposed housing Housing Oppose with comment letter None Pending <br /> Housing development containing 2 residential addressing the following issues: position of <br /> development: units within a single-family residential • The bill would allow for Oppose <br /> zone to be considered ministerially, <br /> approvals significant increases in unless <br /> without discretionary review or density in single-family amended <br /> hearing, if the proposed housing <br /> development meets certain residential neighborhood, <br /> requirements, including, but not by allowing for two <br /> limited to, that the proposed housing primary units plus ADUs, <br /> development would not require without any discretionary <br /> demolition or alteration of housing review <br /> that is subject to a recorded • Impacts to neighborhood <br /> covenant, ordinance, or law that quality, parking, and <br /> restricts rents to levels affordable to services could be <br /> persons and families of moderate, significant as a result. <br /> low, or very low income, that the <br /> proposed housing development does • Propose Historic <br /> not allow for the demolition of more Resource designation <br /> than 25% of the existing exterior amendment language <br /> structural walls, except as provided, <br /> and that the development is not <br /> located within a historic district, is not <br /> included on the State Historic <br /> Resources Inventory, or is not within <br /> a site that is legally designated or <br /> listed as a city or county landmark or <br /> historic property or district. D RAFT <br /> 5 <br /> February 5,2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.