My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
22
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
061615
>
22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 11:53:30 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:21:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/16/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
22
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
130
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
The City is required to show capacity to build 1,107 units affordable to very low- and low- <br /> income households. The site inventory currently shows a capacity of 1,270 units (279 units <br /> approved through affordable housing agreements and 991 units on vacant/underutilized sites) <br /> with 163 units above the required capacity. <br /> The previously approved 177-unit residential development included 27 affordable units, with 6 <br /> of the units rented at rates affordable to very-low-income households (50% of the annual <br /> median income for Alameda County), 12 of the units rented at rates affordable to low-income <br /> households (80% of the annual median income), and nine units rented at rates affordable to <br /> moderate-income households (100% of the annual median income). Because the development <br /> was high density, the remaining 159 units were also categorized as moderate-income <br /> households as defined by HCD. <br /> The current project would provide a total of 10 affordable units that would be affordable to low- <br /> income households with incomes at 80% Area Median Income (AMI). Despite the change in <br /> the units' affordability level, with the current estimated surplus of 163 units in the very-low- <br /> income to the low-income category, the City would continue to meet its RHNA obligations <br /> within the very-low-income to the low-income category by providing a 155 unit surplus. <br /> 7. Hacienda Owners Association <br /> The Hacienda Owners Association has the authority to review and approve the proposed <br /> development before action is taken by the City. A letter of approval from Hacienda is attached. <br /> V. PUD CONSIDERATIONS <br /> The Zoning Ordinance of the Municipal Code sets forth purposes of the Planned Unit <br /> Development District and "considerations" to be addressed in reviewing a PUD development <br /> plan. <br /> 1. Whether the plan is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general <br /> welfare. <br /> The proposed project, as conditioned, meets all applicable City standards concerning <br /> public health, safety, and welfare. The subject development would include the installation <br /> of all required on-site utilities with connections to municipal systems in order to serve the <br /> new development. The project will not generate volumes of traffic that cannot be <br /> accommodated by existing or already planned improvements for City streets and <br /> intersections in the area. The structures would be designed to meet the requirements of <br /> the Uniform Building Code, Fire Code, and other applicable City codes. The proposed <br /> development is compatible with the adjacent uses and would be consistent with the existing <br /> scale and character of the area. The project also would provide 10 affordable housing units <br /> and help the City to meet its requirements for provision of lower income housing. <br /> Therefore, staff believes that the proposed PUD development plan is in the best interests of <br /> the public health, safety, and general welfare, and that this finding can be made. <br /> Summerhill Housing Group Planning Commission <br /> Page 21 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.