CCMIN060600 - Laserfiche WebLink

Jack Dove, 5250 Case Avenue, #110, spoke to Larry Levin of the Housing Commission and learned that there is a possibility of pumlmsing affordable hottqing in Dublin and Livermore. This a reflection of the fact that it is so difficult to secure affordable housing in Pleasanton. IIe warned Council that if it tumed down this project it would be taking away one of the best chances that the City has. He also talked about allowing meals with the housing as an option and not a reqnlmment. tte aged the Council to allow the fee waiver in order to take advantage of the present opportunity. Christine Steiner, 596 Hamilton Way, had mixed feelings about the project. The 1980's concept was to have independent living at a very low cost. It was previously called congregate housing and the idea would be to provide apartments for seniors, meals. activities and other recreation opportunities. It was found that people in this area tended to stay in their homes for a longer period of thne and the congregate housing facilities either went bankrupt or had to seek state licensing to become assisted living lhcilities. Her concern on this particular project is that if the condition of mandatory meals is put onto this project, the situation attracts an older group and it quickly becomes an assisted living project. She is concerned that if the project is mqthred to provide meals then the units atlract an older group and it is really being developed as an assisted living project. She felt that the fee waiver is appropriate, but she had a number of questions and if it goes lbrward, she would recommend that it return to the Assisted Living Committee as a paa of the Housing Commission because the Committee has developed the expertise to look at a project focused on senior needs. Service for the seniors is another concem along with affordability. She would like to support this prt~ject, but feels that it is not the project that she voted on when voting with the Housing Commission. Councilmember Michelnlli asked her for further clarification on her support. Ms. Stoiner raplied that l~om the last Commission meeting a week and one half ago and now them has been significant change. Things at that time were very vague. The main issue is the licensing, the meals, and the PUD requirements. They had some idea that there may bca meal, but she was under the impression that a tb]l kitchen would be part of the units. Many of the congregates went into foreclosure. Why did this happen? The answer was because of the market. When three meals a day are required it becomes an economic burden lbr many people. If people are independent and working. they certainly don't require a meal. HUD says that you don't have to require a meal. Affordability is still an issue. Given the uncertainties of the project and where it is headed, they need to be talking with the Assisted Living Committee. Mayor Talwer asked Ms. Steiner to clarify for whom is she speaking. She replied that she is speaking for herself and given the information that was available, she felt that the Commission would agree with her. There were a lot of questions and she felt that they are being backed into a comer with deadlines and getting things to Council and not wanting to commit City money to a project that they are not sure about. She wants this to succccd, but the meals issue is a known issue. This is what Pleasanton City Council 18 06/06/00 Minutes