My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN020497
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
CCMIN020497
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:36 AM
Creation date
5/10/1999 5:22:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/4/1997
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
Mr. Pico asked if the guidelines required the for sale units to be low income on a <br />permanent basis. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian said the low income restriction runs with the property in perpetuity and is <br />incorporated in the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico referred to the fact that low income housing fees can be used to reimburse the <br />general fund for loss of revenue from the waived fees and he felt this was double-dipping. Not <br />only does the city lose the fee, but the low income fund is depleted by the same amount. He <br />wanted the guidelines to be thoroughly reviewed by the Affordable Housing Commission. He <br />was also concerned about rental units that are now reaching the end of the 25 year requirement <br />to remain affordable and felt there was a need for a mechanism to make the rental units more <br />permanently affordable. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti wanted to proceed with these guidelines. She referred to the funding <br />already spent for the Case Avenue project and felt Scott Erickson could present to Council the <br />report given to the Affordable Housing Commission. She believed flexibility should be part of <br />the guidelines. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver felt some developers may feel their projects qualify for the fee waiver and <br />invest a lot of time and money on a project that may not be acceptable to Council. He felt <br />Council needs to clearly define examples of for sale units and how the guidelines apply and what <br />projects would qualify. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti believed it was more difficult to adapt these guidelines to a for sale <br />product, but the guidelines are definitely needed because it is difficult to find affordable units <br />in this Valley. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis suggested that because the guidelines refer to the growth management <br />ordinance by reference, perhaps the growth management ordinance needs review. She felt the <br />guidelines were important for Council to see how a project would rate if the guidelines were <br />applied. If Council wants more than 15% of a project to be affordable and to have the <br />affordability last longer than 25 years, perhaps it should change the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian did not want the guidelines to conflict with the ordinance. Staff tried to link <br />the two. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti felt staff should come back with more information before Council adopts <br />the guidelines and to get information from the Tri-Valley Affordable Housing Committee. She <br />also felt that the only way to really produce affordable houses is to forget the for sale units and <br />put more effort into the rental market. However, if you piggy-back some of these programs, <br />it may be a way for individuals to get affordable housing. <br /> <br /> 6 2/04/97 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.