CCMIN030706 - Laserfiche WebLink

Reauest of Ponderosa Homes to review the terms for its use of Inclusionarv Unit Credits C1UC's) and the affordable housina requirements in connection with the 172-unit senior aDartment development aDDroved Dreviouslv on the Busch DrODertv. (SR 06:076) Mr. Bocian presented the staff report. Mayor Hosterman noted that the previous Council had spent a significant amount of time on this subject. She had a great deal of concern regarding how and when the IUC's would be used. Council wanted to ensure that it had ultimate discretion as to their use. Mr. Bocian said that was correct, except Council did approve that the IUC's could be used on the PUSD site but for any other site, it would be subject to Council approval. Mayor Hosterman believed staff was asking Council to address two issues which are a result of the Developer and staff not agreeing upon the interpretation of the previous Council's decision. Mr. Brozosky noted that he was a councilmember at the time this matter was decided by Council. Typically, Council has discretion as to whether it will allow IUC's to be allowed on other properties. The commitment Council made at the time was that the Developer could use the IUC's on the option (PUSD) property. Council has the discretion whether to allow the IUC's to be transferred to another site. He pointed out that the IUC resolution states the Developer typically has five years to use the IUC's and in November 2004, Council was aware there was an option on the Busch property. He thought Council wanted the IUC's to have a term of five years from the time the option expired. He asked staff if Attachment 5, Amendment #1 - the Affordable Housing Agreement with Ponderosa Homes II, Inc. was the agreement Council considered at its meeting on November 2, 2004? Mr. Bocian said yes. Mr. Brozosky pointed out that proposed Amendment 1 stated the use of the IUC's is subject to the following terms, one of which states the ICU's will have a term of five years commencing from the date the PUSD either closes escrow or terminates its option on the Exhibit B property. Mr. Bocian said staff included that amendment with the staff report because of staff's recommendation. That alternative stated that the IUC's could only be used on the Busch property. The November 2, 2004 staff report indicated that if Council approved a different alternative, which Council did, the five-year term would start to run from November 2004. Based upon the information in the staff report and Council approving an alternative that was different then staff's recommendation, the Amendment was modified. At the time the allocation of the IUC's was originally discussed, Mr. Brozosky recalled that Council wanted to ensure that the total project never went below 24 percent for affordability. Mr. Thorne believed staff was asking Council to do what made sense and not try and interpret what the previous Council did. Mr. Bocian said that was correct. Pleasanton City Council Minutes 14 03/07/06