SR 06:052 - Laserfiche WebLink

The developer maintains that the Council's action required that the entire development, all initial 363 units plus any new units collectively, have a level of affordability that is not less than 24%. The developer maintains that this is important because at this level of affordability, the IUC's may be sufficient to meet the total affordability requirement on the 23-acre site. If the affordability requirement is higher, IUC may be insufficient to meet all IZO requirements for the site. Further, because applying the 24% to the entire development reduces the number ofIUC's required on the 23-acre site, the developer may have IUC's available after development of this site to use on another site. To justify its position, the developer also references the November 2, 2004 staff report that indicates "A total of 511UC's may be applied to a development on the 23-acre PUSD optioned site provided the total ratio of affordable housing for the entire 363-unit development and any subsequent units will have a minimum of 24% affordable units." In addition, the developer indicates that the draft Amendment #1 included with the November 2,2004 staff report indicates a requirement that the entire development must be 24% affordable. In discussions with the developer, staff recognized the potential confusion with these two sections. However, it has maintained that they are not necessarily inconsistent because the goal was to inform the Council that in no event would there be less than 24% affordability on the site and requiring 24% affordability on the PUSD optioned site assures this situation. Further, because the City Council did not approve all of staff's recommendation at the November 2, 2004 meeting, many changes were made to the Amendment # 1 to reflect Council action. An illustration of the impact of this issue is noted in the table below. SUMMARY OF IMPACT OF AFFORDABLILITY RE UlREMENTS Assuming 125 Senior Single Family Units on the City Ponderosa 23-acre PUSD 0 tioned Site Number of Affordable Units Re uired* 30 25 IUC's Re uired to Meet Affordabilit Re uirements 45 37 Remainin IUC's ** 6 14 *Assumes 24% for "City" column and 20% (Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance requirement) for the "Ponderosa" column **Depending on when these units are developed and Council action on Item #1 above, these IUC's may be used to meet IZO affordability requirements for another development. As indicated, staff has had numerous discussions with the developer on this matter and both parties have produced significant information attempting to clarifY and substantiate its position. The developer's letter dated September 23,2005 (Attachment 2) and the November 2, 2004 staff report are attached for your reference. Regardless of these discussions and the paper trail leading up to this situation, staff is requesting the Council "revisit" this issue and make a decision on these two issues. Staff is not asking the Council to reconsider its decision on the granting of credits or the three items noted above, about which there is no disagreement. To address this situation, staff is recommending the Council consider two options as noted below. SR:06:052 Page 6