My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:258
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2005 12:13:13 PM
Creation date
9/15/2005 4:44:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/20/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:258
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
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
<br />Commissioner Whisnand commented that it would be a waste of the Housing <br />Commission's time if the applicant were not amenable to having any below market rate <br />units. <br />Commissioner Wiest noted that the Housing Commission is not empowered to lower the <br />threshold stated in the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. <br />Ms. Decker suggested that the Housing Commission could forward its comment to the <br />Planning Commission and provide that understanding to the applicant that the <br />Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance does not necessitate the inclusion of affordable units in <br />this project because it has less than 15 units. <br />Vice Chairperson Harris stated that he believed it was inappropriate and unnecessary for <br />the Planning Commission to continue this matter to its August meeting and send it to the <br />Housing Commission when the project has less than half the number of units required for <br />affordable housing under the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. <br />Chairperson Stark noted that the staff recommendation portion of the staff report makes <br />mention of an in lieu fee payment and revenue going into a lower income housing fund <br />for affordable housing project activities. He inquired if applicants would still have to pay <br />the in lieu fee regardless of whether or not their projects are subject to the affordable <br />housing provision of the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. He further inquired what <br />amount went into the fund. <br />Mr. Bocian clarified that every project that does not provide actual affordable units pays <br />the City's in lieu fee. Projects containing 15 or more units are subject to the requirements <br />of the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. <br />Scott Erickson explained that the amount offee paid is based on the type of unit <br />proposed. He stated that single family units over 1,500 square feet in area pay <br />approximately $8,900 per unit, and projects with 1,500 square foot units or less and all <br />multi family units pay about $2,200 per unit. He noted that while townhouses are <br />considered single family, they would pay the lower fee if less than 1,500 square feet in <br />area. He added that the dichotomy in fees was intentional to encourage the building of <br />more units. <br />Ms. Decker advised that the Winter project would fall under the second category as the <br />single family detached units are 1,200 square feet in area, and the two multi family units <br />are 1,054 square feet in size. She reiterated that these units are affordable by design. <br />Vice Chairperson Harris commented that these affordable-by-design units are precisely <br />what the Housing Commission is asking developers and builders to provide. He noted <br />that he had heard a Planning Commission discussion regarding filling the need for these <br />smaller units which may not be affordable for those within 80 percent of the Area Median <br />Page - 4 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.