CCMIN050603 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Brozosky asked if the tenants in the affordable units can own assets. Mr. Bocian said it varies from project to project. For example, at Ridge View Commons, there is no asset test except that interest or earnings on assets is counted as income. For the ownership homes, asset tests are being done. Generally, for senior projects, there are no asset tests for individuals. They will need to retain assets in the event there are health problems in the future. Mark Sweeney, Ponderosa Homes, 6150 Stoneridge Mall Road, said it is essential that Ponderosa get credits on site if the School District does not exercise its option and Ponderosa wants to build a senior project on that property. If a development were five units to the acre, and the credits were allowed, then the overall project would be 31% affordable. Mayor Pico did not feel there was a problem with the on site use of the credits. The issue is the transfer to third parties off site. Mr. Sweeney said the inclusionary zoning ordinance anticipates that there may be a project that could not include affbrdable housing. Ponderosa intended to use the credits itself if it were able to find another property in Pleasanton on which to build market rate houses. If the concern is that Ponderosa gets a fee credit now and another developer could get a credit in the future, that could be dealt with. Ponderosa is hoping to use the 51 units itself or to sell them. Ms. Ayala asked how much that was worth. Mr. Sweeney assumed Council would want units rather than fees from developers and he felt the units were worth substantially more than a fee. He did not know exactly how much that would be. The senior project will cost more than its worth when it is finally built, but Ponderosa has 191 market rate houses it can sell as well as a 22-acre site it may possibly develop in the future. Ponderosa hoped that by providing the extra 51 units of affordable housing that it would get credit somewhere else in the community or be able to pass them along to another developer who needed them. There is no market for affordable units in Pleasanton, but the way the zoning ordinance is set up, it is anticipated there will be. Ms. Ayala again tried to put a value on the credits. Mr. Sweeney said it was impossible to set a value. It depends on the size of the third party development. Ponderosa is absorbing the affordable units in its project because it has 191 market rate houses. If the project has fifteen units and five were required to be affordable, the project would not be feasible. Ms. Hosterman asked if the approval of the bond issuance could be severed from the issue of credits. Mr. Sweeney said that was possible. He said Ponderosa's bond counsel and California Debt Limit Allocation Committee consultant was present to answer questions. Pleasanton City Council 23 05/06/03 Minutes