6 - Laserfiche WebLink

The proposed draft criteria are included in Exhibit A. The prior sites selection criteria, as utilized in the 4th Cycle update, are included for reference as Exhibit B. Sites Selection Criteria: Guiding Principles The Sites Selection Criteria continue to rely on the following guiding ideas or principles, as stated for the 4th Cycle criteria: 1) Conformance to City General Plan policies. 2) "Smart Growth" principles, such as placing housing near transit, promoting a compact urban form, supporting infill development etc. 3) Criteria important for California Tax Credit Allocations (TCAC) for affordable housing funding.3 4) Factors derived from state law and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) guidance in evaluating sites for their readiness and suitability for higher density housing (e.g. site size, availability of infrastructure, absence of environmental and other constraints). Scoring Framework and Selection Methodology As was the case with the prior Housing Element sites evaluation, the criteria are intended to be scored by answering "Yes" or "No" for each question. One point is awarded for each "Yes" answer, with the projects with the most points ranked highest. To minimize the complexity of the evaluation, responses are weighted equally, as a relatively simple metric for side-by-side comparison. It is important to reiterate that this process is intended to provide an initial screening evaluation of sites against each other, based on criteria that are as objective as possible. As described, at least two additional rounds of review and selection will be conducted to determine the ultimate list of sites for inclusion in the Housing Element. Specifically, once all potential sites have been evaluated and scored using the initial criteria, the City Council, with input from the Planning Commission and Housing Commission, will have the opportunity in late 2021 to look at the ranked sites collectively and weigh their merits individually and on aggregate, considering aspects such as geographic location/distribution; any special considerations or concerns (e.g. site-specific constraints, impacts or community concerns; potential yield of units from each site, etc.). This list will be carried forward for technical evaluation through the CEQA review and be subject to preliminary review by HCD. Following this step, in mid- to late- 2022, the City Council will further refine and finalize the list prior to adoption of the Housing Element. Opportunities for public input and engagement will be provided at each of these steps. With respect to the next step for initial sites analysis and selection in late 2021 , staff recommends 3 As part of the 2010 Settlement Agreement associated with the lawsuit over the 4th Cycle Housing Element, the City committed to complete an analysis of sites included in that update against TCAC criteria, in an effort to promote more affordable housing development. While this requirement does not apply to the current 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, the TCAC criteria nonetheless provide objective guidance for the consideration of suitable locations for housing, particularly with respect to access to transit and services, and is thus proposed to be included in the current criteria. Housing Element Update Planning Commission 4 of 8 Housing Element Update Planning Commission 3 of 8 2 of 8 . Clark stated it was not discussed at the most recent City Council or Planning Commission meetings but was discussed when the item was considered by the Chamber of Commerce and PDA. She stated other cities had allowed and some had excluded personal services. She summarized the discussion regarding massage businesses that arose during the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) update, and concerns then about an overabundance of personal services. She Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 July 28, 2021