CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET

Page 10 of 13 with projects most commonly developed with multi-party partnerships and development teams, often with a non-profit builder or organization in the lead. Funding and In-Kind Financial Support Local resources available to the City to support affordable housing include funding (loans, grants, or other direct financial support from the Lower-Income Housing Fund), but could also include land owned (or acquired) by the City and offered as a site for a qualifying affordable project to a third-party developer. The City can also financially support affordable projects by waiving or reducing certain fees or permit costs, taking on entitlement costs or development (e.g., preparation of site surveys, extending utilities, development of a CEQA document), or other similar strategies. Lower Income Housing Fund (LIHF) The City’s IZO provides the option to collect a fee from housing developers in lieu of providing affordable units on-site at the discretion of the City Council. Per the City’s Affordable Housing Fee ordinance (PMC Chapter 17.40), non-residential developments, including retail, hotel/motel, office, and industrial, must also pay affordable housing fees. These “in lieu fee payments”, or affordable housing fees, are collected into the City’s Lower Income Housing Fund (LIHF). The City has collected between approximately $1.75 million-$2.35 million per year in the fund in the past three years (FY21-23); considering offsetting expenditures, which include spending on housing programs and administration, the fund has grown annually by between approximately $685,000 and $1.26 million in the same period. The current LIHF balance stands at approximately $14 million. The majority of the City’s LIHF funds expended towards housing production to date have been used to award loans to non-profit affordable housing developers to build or preserve affordable housing. In turn, affordable housing developers have used the LIHF funds to leverage millions of dollars in tax credit financing and other regional (Measure A1 funds), and state, and federal (HOME) funds. Recent examples of such partnerships include MidPen Housing’s reconstructions of Kottinger Gardens I & II and Satellite Housing (SAHA)/Sunflower Hill’s development of the Sunflower Hill project. City-Owned Land The land is a significant contributor to development costs. The City is currently evaluating City- owned properties that could be developed into housing and considering other suitable sites owned by outside organizations and public entities such as the school district, Caltrans, and/or private owners. It is important to note that any disposition of City-owned or public land for development purposes must comply with the State Surplus Land Act (Gov. Code, §§ 54220- 54234) which prioritizes affordable housing development. In staff’s initial evaluation, while the City owns several individual parcels and properties in Pleasanton, many are subject to restrictions that limit or preclude residential uses; others may be unsuitable or undesirable due to location, size, or other constraints or be more appropriate for other types of development opportunities. Nonetheless, as a future task, and if there is interest in further exploring the development of a housing project on City-owned property, a more thorough assessment would be developed. Page 75 of 90