My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:080
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:080
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2005 9:48:12 AM
Creation date
3/10/2005 1:13:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/5/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:080
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
While all three options have unique benefits and challenges, staff is recommending Option A <br />because it is most consistent with past City practice of not acquiring a privately owned site for <br />the purpose of providing long term housing. Further, as noted, staff has concerns about leading <br />a development effort without fully exploring neighborhood interests and needs. Staff recognizes <br />that this option may lead to a development proposal for a product other than a senior project. <br />However, while staff recognizes the needs of the Kottinger Place Task Force regarding <br />relocation opportunities, it has not pursued senior housing for this site. Ultimately, any project <br />that comes forward on this site will be required to meet Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance <br />requirements that will yield affordable units which is staff's primary concern regarding <br />development orientation. <br /> <br />PROJECT FINANCING/INCLUSIONARY UNIT CREDITS <br /> <br />As noted, staff has had discussions with EAH, the owner and Jack Dove regarding the cost of <br />developing an affordable project. As a result, there have been a number of meetings held during <br />the past year regarding potential financing options including state and federal programs such as <br />the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program and the HUD Section 202 program <br />(which is specifically targeted for affordable senior housing projects). While all available <br />programs are highly competitive, it is felt that a senior project with a significant level of <br />affordability and appropriate amenities would compete favorably. <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Dove has also proposed the concept of generating revenue for a project by selling <br />Inclusionary Unit Credits to another developer(s) that need to meet the requirements of the <br />City's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO) but cannot or would prefer not to integrate <br />affordable units within their projects. This type of option is addressed in Section 17.44.080 of <br />the IZO: <br /> <br /> In the event a project exceeds the total number of lnclusionary Units required in <br /> this Chapter, the Project Owner may request Inclusionary Unit Credits (IUC'S) <br /> which may be used to meet the affordable housing requirements of another <br /> project. Inclusionary Unit Credits are issued to and become the possession of the <br /> Project Owner and may not be transferred to another Project Owner without <br /> approval by the City Council. The number of lnclusionary Unit Credits awarded <br /> for any project is subject to approval by the City Council. <br /> <br />In addition, the IZO also encourages alternative methods of meeting inclusionary requirements <br />as follows: <br /> <br /> Alternate Methods Of Compliance: Applicants may propose creative concepts for <br /> meeting the requirements of this chapter, in order to bring down the cost of <br /> providing inclusionary units, whether on- or off-site. The city council may approve <br /> alternate methods of compliance with this chapter if the applicant demonstrates <br /> that such alternate method meets the purpose of this chapter. <br /> <br />SR:05:080 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.