SR 06:052 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 2 . WISER SWt;t;NEY September 23, 2005 Mr. Nelson Fialho City Manager City of Pleasanton P.O. Box 520 Pleasanton. CA 94566 RE: Affordable Housing Credits Dear Nelson: Thank you again for taking the time to meet with Kile Morgan and me to discuss the continuing confusion around the City Council approval on November 2, 2004. ofInclusionary Unit Credits ("IUC's') in connection with our In-unit senior apartment development. Since December 2004, your Staff and Ponderosa have tried to clarify exactly what the Council approved on that night. Ponderosa Homes and the City of Pleasanton have a clear understanding of some of the Conditions of Approval granting Ponderosa Homes ("Ponderosa") 51 IUC's. . The lUC's can be used only by Ponderosa Homes or a subsidiary owned by a majority of Ponderosa or exclusively by its Chairman, Kile Morgan, Jr" and cannot otherwise be transferred. . The priority is to use the IUC's on the 23-acre Busch site currently under option with the Pleasanton Unified School District ("PUSD Option Site"). If the School District does not exercise their option to purchase, Ponderosa would build a housing development on the property and would utilize its credits (or a portion of its credits) to satisfy its affordable housing obligations. Ponderosa may request the use of its credits on an alternate site in Pleasanton. Should Ponderosa propose to use the lUC's on a site other than the PUSD Option Site, that approval would be subject to a City Council vote. . The use of the IUC's would be subject to the following ratios: If used on a multi-family development: I IUC for each affordable unit required. If used for a condo Itownhome: 1.5 lUC's for each affordable unit required. If used for a senior housing single-family unit: 1.5 lUC's for each affordable unit required. If used for single-family market-rate housing: 2 IUC's for each affordable unit required. The issues on which we do not agree with Staff's interpretation of the November 2nd Staff Report, the discussion of the item at the City Council meeting, and the subsequent City Council vote. are the term of the lUC's and the percentage of Affordable Units required on the PUSD Option Site. The issue of credits is very complicated and can be confusing. In order to make certain that City Council members understood our request, we met (or talked to) each member individually prior to the public hearing on November 2, 2004. Although we didn't ask for. and the councilmembers didn't offer, their opinion of our request prior to the public hearing, there is no doubt that they understood our position. If the present City Council members could take the time to re~!he [)VD of thLI'!9..vember 2,2004 meeting. we believe that they would conclude that Staff's explanation at the M'i'lvemlier-2 meeting of the City's position regarding the term uf dll; IUC';) amrt1'lei'eqUlred level of affordability on the PUSD Option Site is consistent with what we requested at the podium that evening and the City Council vote. We requested. and the City Council granted us. a term of 5 years commencing from the date the PUSD either closes escrow or terminates it option on the PUSD Option Site and we can point to paragraphs in the Staff Report that support our position. Staff's position is that we have 5 years from the City Council approval to request the use of Credits on sites other than the PUSD Option Site and as to the PUSD Option Site, we have 5 years from the date the PUSD either closes escrow or terminates it option. In order for us to get the benefit of the bargain that we made with the City, the term must be structured to allow us to request the use of the Credits on sites other than the PUSD Option Site or to use them on the PUSD Option Site itself for a 5 6200 St(JIleridge Mall Road, Suite 120, Pleasanton, California 94588 . 925227-7800 925460-3740