Laserfiche WebLink
Public Comments <br />February 24, 2022 <br />Pleasanton Housing Element Policies, February 28, 2022 Agenda <br />Dear HoiLsing Commissioners, <br />ATTACHMENT 7 <br />Following are my observations on the recommendations in the staff report and a <br />few more recommendations. These create an "Affordable Housing Toolbox" of <br />policies that the Commissions, Council, and staff can pick and choose from in the <br />future to create affordable housing. <br />• Low Income Housing Fund <br />This fund has been nibbled away at with housing -related expenses rather <br />building affordable housing or purchasing land so non-profit housing <br />developers can build affordable housing. The fee is too low for commercial <br />and industrial projects. For housing projects consider charging per square <br />foot, thereby incentivizing smaller units. <br />• Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance <br />Inclusionary housing will never meet our need. 20% of the total RHNA <br />number of 5,965 units is 1,193. It is certainly a large number, but very short <br />of our total of 3,652 for Extremely Low, Very Low, Low and Moderate. <br />IZO is another tool in our Toolbox. Every project should include affordable <br />units, but this alone will not meet the need. In the past Pleasanton has <br />accepted LIHF instead of inclusionary units (for example the apartments at <br />Stanley and Bernal). Something like 50% of the total LIHF was not used to <br />create housing so units were lost. Do not allow this switch in the future. <br />• Density Bonus Ordinance <br />It should be updated. <br />• Affordable Housing Overlay Zone <br />Yes, let's explore this. Anther tool in our Affordable Housing Toolbox. <br />• Define Workforce Housing <br />I support Definition #1 with a slight adjustment. "Housing intended for and <br />affordable to Pleasanton employees and households earning local wages... ". <br />Call it "Pleasanton Workforce", which I believe was the intent in the past. <br />The phrase has morphed over time to represent a specific income subset <br />which I think is unfortunate. Everyone in the workforce works. Limiting it <br />implies otherwise. We can build housing targeted for all AMIs relative to <br />their % of jobs in Pleasanton and our RHNA requirements. <br />26 <br />