My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040406
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
CCMIN040406
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:43 AM
Creation date
4/3/2006 1:28:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/4/2006
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN040406
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Mr. Bocian said the definition of high density as outlined in the General Plan is <br />considered over eight units to the acre. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky noted that it was mentioned ABAG could change the way in which it does <br />regional allocations. He asked if the City could assume these changes would be made. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho said something would happen but staff has not formulated the assumption. <br />There is some reform but staff is uncertain about the impact for localities. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky inquired about ABAG's requirement for below market rate restricted units. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian said there was no requirement. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky asked if subsidy vouchers could be utilized to meet regional needs? <br />Mr. Bocian did not believe subsidy vouchers counted as affordable units. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky asked if ABAG allowed secondary units to be counted towards the regional <br /> <br />need? <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian said only if the secondary units are restricted. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky believed the City could work with the variable of using secondary units for <br />new developments towards the regional housing needs. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho said secondary units that would be counted towards the regional housing <br />needs would not only be for new developments but existing developments. If existing property <br />owners were willing to enter into a restricted agreement with the City, it would count towards the <br />City's arena obligations. The City currently does not have a process for using secondary units <br />that would count towards the regional housing needs for new and existing developments. The <br />State and ABAG are concerned with having more units on the ground or converting existing <br />market rate stock into affordable units. The City could either do this on its own or partner with a <br />non-profit organization to convert secondary units to restricted units, or convert either all or a <br />portion of existing apartment complexes to meet the regional needs. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern believed Council should look at using separate strategies. One strategy <br />would be for existing units that are currently within the City and what could be done to increase <br />acquisition and provide more without building, which would be less expensive in the long run <br />than supporting the construction of new buildings. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian did not know if it would be less expensive as each development is unique. <br />He believed having a two-prong strategy looking at existing and new units made sense. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern believed using the two separate strategies would make the vision more <br />clear. With the additional secondary units discussed and the possibility of trying to form a <br />relationship with a property owner to make the units affordable, she asked if it generated a <br />significant amount of paperwork that the property owners would have to contend with. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian said there would be some paperwork involved similar to the program for <br />apartment complexes in the City. He believed this process could be streamlined. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />04/04/06 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.