Laserfiche WebLink
into in a sensible and reasonable way, but if you try to dictate exactly how much will be built, <br />you will fail. It is not totally our decision. It depends on the economy. She is committed to <br />making it work to the midpoint, but felt there will be very tedious difficulties if we try to change <br />it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver made the point again that more than 650 units have been allocated. How do <br />you explain that? He did not think it was a process of market control, it is controlling growth. <br /> <br /> A substitute motion was made by Mr. Pico, seconded by Mr. Tarver, to adopt the <br />recommendation of the General Plan Steering Committee but that there be an exemption <br />above the 350 units for any allocations for the San Francisco Water Department Bernal <br />Property, to read as follows: "Use the Growth Management Program to limit residential <br />allocations to between 0 and 650 units per year, and reserve an additional 100 units per <br />year for projects which include 25 percent or more lower-income housing units. Other than <br />units for the San Francisco Bernal Avenue project this limitation shall be reduced to 350 <br />units (including a 100 unit affordable housing priority) starting the fh'st year possible, <br />consistent with the allotment reservations granted prior to 1996. The annual allocation <br />should be based on a periodic assessment of housing need, employment growth, the <br />availability of infrastructure, and the city's ability to provide public services. Exemptions <br />and unused allocations from prior years may be added to the maximum until the 350 unit <br />per year maximum begins." <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr wanted to keep the consideration for the 100 units for lower income housing. <br />She wanted to retain that incentive and felt we would not accomplish our regional goals without <br />it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet felt the motion included the 100' units. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti said that means there are only 250 units, plus 100 for lower income. <br /> <br />Th~ r011 c.~ll vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmember Pico and Mayor Tarvet <br />NOES: Councilmembers- Dennis, Michelotti, and Mohr <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> The substitute motion failed. <br /> <br />07/02/96 -20- <br /> <br /> <br />