PC 012203 - Laserfiche WebLink

depend on many factors, including the type of proj ects, their location, design, and prevailing regional and state economic conditions. The Housing Element indicates that the City will give its best effort to move forward with called-For housing. Mr. Iserson noted that the State was in the process of performing a very detailed review, and added that he spoke with the representatives daily. The representatives worked very closely with him during the revision process; they indicated at that time that the docwnent looked proper after a cursory review, and that it appeared that the responses were being adequately addressed. The more formal process is currently underway, and they would determine whether the Housing Element would be certified by the end of January. Based on the fact that the initial responses seemed to be adequate, staff was moving forward in the process. He added that many good housing policies have been added which were not present in the 1996 update. Mr. Iserson advised that the City Council would consider the Housing Element on February 4, 2003, and he believed that staff would have the State's response by then. Staff recommended that the Plaru~ing Commission adopt a motion approving the Negative Declaration, and recommend the Housing Element to City Council. In response to an inquiry by CJommissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson coal-armed that ITCD had toured the City with staff two years ago, and unfortunately their State reviewer changed aRer the tour. The new reviewer did participate in a tour with a housing advocate group that did not include staff or any Councilmembers. in response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin, Mr. Iserson noted that if the ABAG projections were made this year, he believed a downward trend in employment generation would be demonstrated. 1-Iowever, the fair share housing numbers would not change, even though employment was a component of those numbers, the original numbers will continue to be used. In response to an inquiry by G'hairperson Arkin, Mr. Iserson replied that if the Housing Element was approved by the Council but was not certified by the State, the General Plan would. be open to legal challenge if the City self-ec.rN fied the Housing Eleinent_ Other sanctions may be imposed by a court if there was a lawsuit. Ms_ Nerland advised that self-certification would put the burden on the City to justify the Housing Element as adequate; a State certified plan would place the presumption in the City's favor in the event of a challenge. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sullivan, Mr. Iserson replied that he was concerned about certification at this point, and noted that the initial response from the State had been more positive. The State reviewer was careful to disclaim that third party PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 22, 2003 Page 16