CCMIN041503 - Laserfiche WebLink

Park could be an area of mixed use. What incentives can the City use to keep those units that are going off-line? The City is building affordable units and losing other affordable units every year. Smaller houses can be built for less money. The City should seek developers who can do this. The public hearing was closed. Mr. Brozosky thanked staff for their work on this project for the years of work, getting a consensus, and getting the HCD approval. He felt there should be no changes in the Housing Element. Program No. 16.5 concerns working with employers in parmerships to participate in progress to make housing affordable to their workers. He hoped the businesses in the community and the Chamber take an active role in trying to accomplish some of the goals. He also encouraged the community to work with non- profits such as Habitat for Humanity. A priority of Council is to retain the affordable housing units that are expiring. There is a perpetuity task fome that is making progress, coming up with ideas that can be implemented. It costs much more to build new units than it does to retain the existing ones. He agreed with the need for smaller units and there are programs proposed to encourage small units. Council needs to do whatever it can to get smaller units built in the community. The 4,000 square foot size of a new home built in Pleasanton is considered small. This needs to be looked at, especially for first time buyers. It is the people in the middle that are being squeezed out. It was moved by Mr. Brozosky, seconded by Ms. Hosterman, adopting the finding of DeMinimus Impact for purposes of the Department of Fish and Game fee; adopting Resolution No. 03-033, approving a Negative Declaration for an Amendment to the Housing Element of the General Plan; and adopting Resolution No. 03-034, approving the Housing Element of the General Plan. Ms. Hosterman thanked everyone involved in this long process for their efforts. She did not like other agencies telling the City what to do to make the community a better place to live. The State, after all has not done a good job at addressing traffic and energy concerns. They do not address a number of other community wide issues that are of concern to Pleasanton, including the impact on the schools, water issues, air quality concerns, and other issues Council has discussed. She did not think the State did a very good job of acknowledging the ultimate goal of municipalities, providing a self sustaining and diverse community which includes opportunities for employment, education, and recreation. Self sustaining means reaching economic health, maintaining environmental health, and quality of life for everyone in the community without selling out to development in the form of ugly, un-self-sustaining sprawl. She is very concerned about this along with ongoing and unfunded mandates. What these 18 goals do is represent a bar which Pleasanton can hope to reach by adding additional workforce housing and going to work to provide additional affordable housing for this community. She pledged to work hard with Council, residents, and staff to reach that bar within the constraints the community has already placed through a voter approved cap on housing and the urban growth boundary. This plan gives Pleasanton a lot of room from which to work. Pleasanton City Council 20 04/15/03 Minutes