CCMIN050404 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Pico was not opposed to deferring thc payment of thc in-lieu park dedication fees until the end of January 2005. He also was not opposed in granting the applicants its request to go back to the Planning Commission to see if they could convince the Commission that there might be some rationale in adjusting the amount of the fee. Ms. Hosterman wondered if it would be appropriate to allow the applicant the oppommity to go back to the Planning Commission to see if they could convince the Commission that there might be some rationale in adjusting the amount of the fee. Ms. McKeehan believed that if Council chose to move in this direction, that the Parks and Recreation Commission should be given the same opportunity. Ms. Ayala pointed out that staffrecommended the postponement of the in-lieu park dedication fees for the Ponderosa/Busch affordable senior apartment project until December 2004. Mayor Pico did not believe it would be a problem in honoring the applicant's request to postpone the in-lieu park dedication fees until January 2005. He did not believe this request would have any impact on the progranuning for the use of these funds. Ms. Ayala was not in favor of allowing the developer the oppommity to go back through the process with the Housing and Planning Commissions. She pointed out that the City is getting dose to build out, and Council is currently going through the General Plan process. The issue of affordability is a major topic and will be addressed during the General Plan review. She noted that ABAG is asking the City for 4,000 affordable housing units, and the City has a 29,000 household cap. If the City ever started to adjust units and started looking at the affordable units and its cap, the City could end up with no fees left as it approaches build out. She did not believe Council should be setting a precedent, as the City is so close to build out. She had no desire to start this process all over again. She pointed out that Condition #74 for this project states that the developer shall pay any and all fees to which property may be subject prior to issuance of building permits. The type and mount of the fee shall be those in effect at the time the building permit is issued. She believed Council had already made concessions on this project. She was aware that staff did its due diligence in looking at the portfolio for the affordable housing program in which the developer was able to participate. She believed Council was getting itself into a situation where developers in the future could come to Council and continue to ask for reconsideration in their development plans. Ms. Hosterman disagreed with Ms. Ayala's comments. From her perspective it was not only a fact based fee issue, but also an equity issue, particularly given the timing. She believed there was plenty of time to allow the postponement of the in-lieu park dedication fees for the entire amount. As long as staffis in concurrence, she believed the Pleasanton City Council 12 05/04/04 Minutes