Laserfiche WebLink
487 <br /> <br />Item 6e <br />GP-90-6, Application of Joseph W. Callahan and Gary Hansen roAmend <br />the Land Use Element of the General Plan of an Approximately <br />12.52 Acre Site, Consisting of the 11.3 Acre Madden Property <br />{,,Commercial ~ Offices"), the .91 Acre Auqusta Property <br />(,,Commercial ~d Offices"), and the .33 Acre Westfall Property <br />("Medi-m Density Residential") to "Hiqh Density Residential" or to <br />Any Other Land Use Desiqnation Deemed in the Public Interest <br /> <br />Consider Adoption of a Neqative Declaration <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift presented his report (SR 90:380) regarding the <br />matter. <br /> <br /> A discussion was held on the involvement of Amador Valley <br />Savings and Loan in the project and Mr. Butler's and Ms. Mohr's <br />interest in Amador Valley Savings and Loan. Because Mr. Brandes <br />was absent, Mr. Roush askedMr. Butler and Ms. Mohr to draw straws. <br />Ms. Mohr was selected to vote on the matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br />application. <br /> <br /> Mr. Callahan stated that he had no comments about the Staff <br />Report. He indicated that the project proposes to sell 15% of the <br />moderate-income units and rent out 20% of the low-income units, <br />which would total more than what is required in the Growth <br />Management Exemption Ordinance. He added that a few years ago, he <br />made a recommendation to the Low-Income Housing Committee that it <br />adopt a "density trade credit" policy for low-income housing which <br />would allow a small project's inability to accommodate the required <br />percentage for low-income units to be offset by a greater <br />percentage on a larger project that could readily accommodate it. <br />He inquired what the status of the review of these low-income <br />ordinances was. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer replied that Council has not reviewed the <br /> ordinances. He asked Mr. Swift if Mr. Callahan's proposal of 15% <br /> moderate-income units for sale and 20% low-income units for rent <br /> would meet the Growth Management Exemption Ordinance requirement of <br /> 25% affordable units. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that the Ordinance indicates an exemption <br /> for 25% low-income units and no exemption for moderate-income <br /> units. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked Mr. Callahan if there would be a problem with <br /> attaching a condition of approval to the General Plan amendment to <br /> specify that 25% would be affordable to low and moderate income. <br /> <br /> 9-18-90 <br /> - 13 - <br /> <br /> <br />