Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Iserson said that was not precluded. The goals and policies set forth how the City <br />process should proceed generally. If there is a particular proposal that seems to work better with <br />a concentration of units, then exceptions could occur. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti then referred to the goal of 25% of the housing being at low and very low <br />income. How does that work with the exemptions or waiver of affordable housing fees when <br />you reach the 25%? <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson said that was referring to 25% of all multiple family units, not all housing. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti realized that was 25% of all new housing, not individual projects. The <br />recommendation to go beyond inclusionary zoning, which is 15%, to encourage a high <br />percentage would then trigger some of the waiver of fees in whatever project there was. <br /> <br /> Mr. Iserson said that was still part of the program. Staff was just trying to raise the <br />percentage where possible. <br /> <br />Mayor Pico declared the public hearing open. <br /> <br /> Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, said he appreciated the efforts of the Housing Task <br />Force. The Task Force and staff did a great job. He did have a few suggestions. Program 1.1 - <br />delete "as long as level-of-service standards and other City policies are maintained." Program <br />2.1 - change "discourage" to "prohibit". Program 4.1 does that mean a person can buy a one <br />acre lot in Pleasanton and put a mobile home or factory built housing on it? <br /> <br /> Mr. Iserson said if all zoning and design review requirements were met, it would be <br />allowed. There is a design review hearing process that would have to occur. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hovingh noted the use of the word "moderate" and in Policy 13, the target is for 15% <br />of the housing stock at full development (buildout?) to be low and very low income households. <br />That is 4,000 units. The City is currently at about 26,000 units, does that mean that virtually all <br />the units left to be built would have to meet the needs of low and very low income housing? <br />Who is going to finance this? Program 10.2 talks about moderate units, and there was no room <br />for moderate income units and he was concerned about that. Finally, with regard to second units, <br />he felt the second units should be affbrdable in perpetuity or not count them at all. A person <br />could build a second unit and then decide not to rent it or else ask a high price for it. That should <br />not count under Policy 13 towards the 15% affordable units. He then referred to Goal 3 under <br />Housing Tenure "Ensure that sufficient rental housing units are provided and retained to serve <br />Pleasanton residents who choose to rent or who cannot afford ownership housing." Pleasanton <br />residents are already here, why add this? He approved of the staff deletion in Program 11.1. <br />Program 13.2 he would like to delete the words "wherever possible". Program 13.8 - Use <br />"require" rather than "target". He felt Policy 15 may be inconsistent with Policy 13. He <br />approved Program 16.5 and felt it was a good comment. In Policy 17 he referred to the "live and <br />work" language and again felt if people live in Pleasanton, why do they need the aftbrdable <br />housing program. He would delete the word "live". Under Program 18.4, it says "if the City is <br />not successful in retaining the units as below market-rate housing, the City should begin working <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 <br />Minutes <br /> <br />03/19/02 <br /> <br /> <br />