19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Appendix G - Housing Resources: Identifies local resources available to support the continued development, preservation, and rehabilitation of housing in Pleasanton; as well as opportunities for energy conservation. In addition to Pleasanton-specific resources, there are regional resources that can support the City's housing goals, including those offered through Alameda County and the Housing Authority of the County of Alameda (HACA), the State, and the Federal government. This appendix was previously reviewed by the Council but includes very minor clarifications and edits to the text to respond to feedback. DOCUMENT FEEDBACK TO DATE Community Meeting Themes- June 14, 2022 Some themes expressed at the Community meeting include: • Concern about modifying the zoning for sites that currently allow automotive uses such that housing is allowed (i.e., Area 11 , Old Santa Rita), as those uses will have limited opportunity to relocate in Pleasanton • Acknowledgement that the Housing Element appears to incorporate feedback to date • Request for stronger linkage between the Climate Action Plan (CAP 2.0) and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and the Housing Element • A need for additional workforce housing Planning Commission Summary — June 22, 2022 The Planning Commission discussed the Draft Housing Element on June 22. The Commission considered if policies related to low-income and moderate-income housing should be "unbundled" throughout the policies and programs (i.e., if the Housing Element should have tailored policies or programs for each lower-income and moderate-income housing). One comment indicated that financial incentives should be primarily allocated to lower-income housing whereas the City should use other types of mechanisms and strategies to promote moderate-income housing. The subsidy required to create an affordable unit is significant and strategies such as creating units that are "affordable by design" can yield moderate-income units, reserving a greater proportion of City and other funds to be appropriated to lower-income units. The Commission nonetheless recognized that RHNA reflects various income categories, each of which the City's policies and programs must explicitly address. In Program 1.7, Number 2, it was requested that the last two sentences be written to more clearly articulate the desire to generate affordability by design and use appropriate density ranges to achieve that goal. The Commission discussed the three "priorities" listed in Policy 2.6 and how in practical terms "priority" is applied when projects are generally not evaluated one against another. The Commission questioned if Priority 2 (for projects with higher than the minimum percentage of affordability) should be moved to Priority 1 and if the percentages listed in Priority 2 should be increased to something closer to 30 percent or Page 12 of 18