CC MIN 04192022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Balch expressed concerns over the increased building costs from a Universal Design ordinance and checklist and noted it is worth having a conversation about whether they should apply to single-family homes, duplexes, and triplexes. He noted he remains challenged by the "whenever feasible" phrasing not for the building official but specifically for tenant and first-buyer input because he would often see COAs come back to the Planning Commission years after the fact. He echoed Mayor Brown's concerns about mandating mobility features in 10% of a large development's units as recommended for fears of raising construction costs. He noted the City is expecting many multi-family projects in the future. He called for input from the Planning Commission. Councilmember Narum questioned the need for a Universal Design ordinance which would add costs to single-family, duplex, and triplex units. She advised she would be interested in a deeper look at COA's while echoing Councilmember Balch's concerns about the language and Mayor Brown's concerns about the percentage of units with mandated mobility features. Councilmember Testa advised construction cost concerns are low-hanging fruit because buyers will have to pay for the options they want so they chose to add construction costs. In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark advised cost regulation would be difficult and require a large amount of paperwork to verify whether a developer's request was reasonable. She advised because COAs are negotiated instead of being imposed there is a track record of success in having developers accept them. She explained there is less risk of a challenge to the California Department of Housing and Community Development if the City makes the accessibility requests as a COA and not as a mandated ordinance. Councilmember Testa expressed interest in this item returning to the City Council. Councilmember Arkin explained the first two elements of the item would see the cost passed on to the buyer who has needs for the options. She advised having the Universal Design ordinance be optional as the better option. She expressed uncertainty about the third item but is inclined against it. She requested more information if the item comes back to City Council. Mayor Brown expressed strong support for the first two components. She noted the City Council just discussed spending $10 million on an all-abilities playground and stated the playground's users need suitable places to live in Pleasanton. She expressed support for the three recommendations and stated she looks forward to the staff coming back to the City Council with suggestions. She noted future conversions are at a much greater cost for low-income residents. She encouraged her peers to consider wheelchair-bound residents. Mayor Brown moved to approve the staffs recommendation. Councilmember Testa seconded the motion. In response to Councilmember Balch, Interim City Manager Dolan confirmed staff would reassess the language he had questioned earlier in the discussion. He confirmed the 10% component would also be reevaluated based on feedback. Mayor Brown stated the 5% or 10% issue can be discussed when this subject returns to the City Council. Councilmember Balch expressed support for the motion. In response to Councilmember Arkin, Director Clark stated the 2020 Census estimates that 7.5% of Pleasanton residents have some form of disability. She noted there is a wide range in the level of disabilities. City Council Minutes Page 11 of 15 April 19, 2022