My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 09/19/77
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
PC 09/19/77
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/31/2017 4:19:21 PM
Creation date
4/30/2007 11:46:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/19/1977
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 09/19/77
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Housin Standards - Commissioner Wood questioned that funds would continue <br />to e forthcoming, what with the present push for urban development. <br />Secretary Harris told the Commissioners that Section 8 funding is avail- <br />able right now. <br />Commissioner Doherty asked if staff gave this section a thorough review <br />from a financial standpoint. Mr. Swift replied that staff had done exten- <br />sive research on this but that there are many variables. He discovered that <br />the subsidy allowed for subsidized housing is too low. These deficiencies <br />are currently being looked at by Congress. Staff has been in contact with <br />HUD to obtain exemptions so Section 8 could be applied in high rent areas. <br />Considerable discussion ensued on this issue as to how the program could be <br />administered effectively and equitably. <br />Commissioner Doherty asked if staff has determined how many people in town <br />today would qualify for Section 8 subsidy and Mr. Swift indicated rough <br />figures from 1975 show about 13$. <br />Commissioner Doherty then asked if something could be inserted in the plan <br />which would allow Pleasanton residents and/or relatives of said residents <br />be given first priority for all such housing subsidies. The City Attorney <br />indicated there is a discrimination factor involved here as the program <br />would be open to the public in general. He would question whether this <br />can be inserted in the Plan, however, he would research the matter. <br />Commissioner Shepherd asked whether the Pleasanton Housing Authority be <br />empowered to handle certification under Section 8. At the present time, <br />Alameda County Housing Authority does this job. Commissioner Wood feels <br />the local jurisdiction should take care of this. <br />A motion was entered and adopted accepting the mandatory system elements 1, <br />2, 3 and 4 and that under Housing Standards, the City Attorney was requested <br />to investigate possibility of giving Pleasanton residents and/or relatives <br />of said residents first priority for subsidized housing, and also recom- <br />mended that the Pleasanton Housing Authority administer the certification <br />program for Section 8 subsidies. <br />Roll Call Vote <br />Motion: Doherty <br />Seconded: Wood <br />Ayes: Doherty, Shepherd, Wood and Chairman Butler <br />Noes: Jamieson <br />Absent: None <br />Abstain: None <br />Incentive System Elements <br />Environmental Concerns - Chairman Butler felt that the weighting here should <br />be 25-30~, rather than 40~, with the balance going to fiscal concerns. <br />Secretary Harris explained that the 40~ figure was the consensus opinion of <br />the GMP committee members. <br />Chairman Butler then asked how the Design section worked, he having a <br />problem with it. Commissioner Shepherd concurred, and said he would put <br />more points into traffic circulation. Commissioner Doherty also registered <br />a problem on open space. Secretary Harris explained the difference lies <br />in private and public maintenance costs. <br />-5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.