Laserfiche WebLink
Housing Element update, which describes many other locations in the City suitable for senior <br />and affordable housing. An East Side land use study could investigate what additional <br />opportunities exist for providing more senior and affordable housing. Affordable housing <br />advocates have always said that 100% subsidized housing projects do not work, however this is <br />what they are now proposing. We do not want more market rate housing on the Bemal property <br />just to get more subsidized housing. In a letter from the Tri-Valley Interfaith Poverty Forum <br />submitted to the Task Force, it requested 15-20 acres at 30-50 units per acre and three to four <br />story buildings for subsidized public housing. Their intentions are good, but this is not what the <br />city wants. He was concerned that 35% of the Task Force members are not Pleasanton residents. <br />This means that nonresidents are voting on policies that affect the number of homes within our <br />city. <br /> <br /> Kimberly Rowland, 3650 Locke Court, indicated the language of the citizens' initiative <br />was very clear and she urged Council to adopt the initiative. She said she voted for Measure I <br />and was willing to pay a tax to keep housing on the Bemal property limited to 374 homes, with <br />430 acres for community use. She felt the houses being built on the property now are too close <br />to Bemal Avenue and she objected to the loss of the trees. This is the gateway to the city and she <br />would have preferred to leave it a hay field, but she agreed with the community uses. She did <br />not think this was an affordable housing issue. There are many areas for affordable housing. <br />She encouraged Council to adopt the initiative as is. <br /> <br /> Matt Morrison, 5581-A Sonoma Drive, said he had come to Council to urge adoption of <br />the initiative, but he was concerned about a competing measure that would overrule the initiative <br />and asked for clarification. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said with respect to the Task Force recommendations, if there was a <br />Commission review process and then adoption by Council of a specific plan, then that could be <br />submitted to the voters for ratification. If that were ratified, then it would supersede any plan <br />previously adopted by Council. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mordson asked if the citizens' initiative could be adopted and then placed on the <br />ballot for ratification to protect it against any competing measure? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the Election Code requires an initiative to be either adopted or put to a <br />vote of the people. <br /> <br /> Mr. Morrison wanted Council to adopt the initiative, but was concemed about the Task <br />Force measure going on the ballot and the adoption of the initiative being a short-lived victory. <br />Until the Task Force issue is decided, he wanted Council to put off adopting the initiative. <br />Perhaps Council could request a report. He felt there was already a lot of confusion in the <br />community and he felt people wanted the chance to choose on the ballot. He was certain the <br />initiative would get the majority vote because people are concerned about additional housing. If <br />Council adopts the initiative and later the Task Force recommendations go on the ballot, he <br />believed people would support it because there are a lot of good ideas. He preferred that there be <br />a separate measure regarding housing. He believed the community wanted to see the <br />infrastructure and the benefits before they see more houses on that property. He felt a third of <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 8 05/21/02 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />