21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Public Comments ATTACHMENT 7 Page 2 Comments on the staff report: (Housing Commission Staff Report, Pages 2 — 5) There's a lot of room to increase LIHF fees on commercial development, even without the expense of a new nexus study. You can see from the 2018 study that commercial development was charged a tiny fraction of the maximum allowable. NonresldenUal Housing Linkage Fee Nexus Study Draft Report 02/26/10 Table 1 Summary of Maximum Allowable Fees and EPS Recommended Fee Levels Land Use Maximutn rroe Pmviakms y Recemmanded FeeAan�a _ . --20% _ . l 1504 ix+so A win R ON s7 N Ad 27 A Wtels/Motel $4969 $512 $7.66 $1024 Retai $211.06 52174 532.61 543.48 Office/Light Industrial/RBD $82.56 n 50 $12.75 517.01 (1) Incudes staled share of 2016 maximum fee pals 3% administrative costs Please raise fees for commercial development! Pleasanton today has a HUGE jobs/housing imbalance that burdens our region with in -commute traffic and emissions from outside the Tri - Valley. Do we really need to attract even more business with the lure of inadequate fees? Let's attract businesses that value housing benefits for their employees and opportunities for long term financial partnership with an emerging carbon neutral city in the carbon economy. Providing employers with the ability to secure nearby, attractive, housing for their workforce should be the new goal. In terms of the uses of the LIHF, I strongly believe this money should be reserved for building affordable housing only. For instance, why was Covid-19 rent supplement grant program LIHF funded as opposed to using some of the $8 million Pleasanton received in Covid relief? Enforcing reduced rents charged for IZO units in perpetuity seems cumbersome and expensive, especially considering the small number of units provided. Some of the fund expenditures, such as the rapid rehousing program, housing counseling services, legal eviction services, and homeless intervention services, seem to be the direct result of failing to invest LIHF funds in a enough affordable units. If businesses are required or asked to make increased contributions to the LIHF, they will rightly expect their money to provide affordable housing opportunities for their employees. Pleasanton housing policy should support that expectation. Facilitating nonprofit development should be the primary use of the LIHF. While initially more costly, nonprofit development is also the most well-managed and designed, especially if it includes Moderate Income units. Furthermore, nonprofit development is the best way for Pleasanton to assure efficient use and planning control of its limited land 22