My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2024
>
121724
>
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2024 11:39:08 AM
Creation date
12/11/2024 11:13:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/17/2024
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
893
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
Page 10 of 17 <br />Peer Jurisdictions: <br />Average Fee <br />Burden <br />$162,890 <br /> <br />Staff recommends Alternative 2, which discounts the affordable housing in-lieu fee to a level <br />that is within the feasible burden, and similar to the total fee burden charged by peer <br />jurisdictions. <br /> <br />While this may have the consequence of encouraging more projects to seek to “fee out” of <br />their on-site affordable requirement, the City Council would have the discretion to approve <br />such requests, and even if such requests were approved, it would not have a significant effect <br />on affordable housing production. At the same time, this alternative would reduce burden on <br />smaller residential projects that qualify to pay the fee per the IZO. These small projects, that <br />usually involve one or a handful of single-family units on infill sites, are predominantly built by <br />individuals and small investors, and comprise the largest share of remaining new single-family <br />home construction in Pleasanton. <br /> <br />Residential – Townhomes: Alternative <br />It is recommended the City adopt CFF, TIF and Affordable Housing Fees at the maximum level <br />supported by the study for townhome projects. No other alternatives are proposed for this fee <br />category. See Table 9 <br /> <br />The total fee burden is within the estimated capacity for this type of development, meaning it <br />can support the increased fees as recommended and justified by the fee study. Note that the <br />peer cities comparable average is not provided for townhomes, because staff found that <br />different jurisdictions classify and/or group townhomes differently, with some putting them into <br />the same category as detached SFR, and others grouping them with attached units such as <br />apartments. <br /> <br />Table 9: Residential Townhomes – Fee Recommendation <br /> Recommendation: Adopt Maximum Fees <br /> Fee (Per Sq. Ft.) Estimated Fee (Per <br />Unit)1 <br />Capital Facilities Fee $11.87 $23,742 <br />Transportation Fee $8.23 $16,452 <br />Affordable Housing Fee $42.10 $84,200 <br />Total Fee Burden $62.20 $124,394 <br /> <br />Estimated Fee Burden “Capacity” $118,096 <br />1. Representative fee, for a typical 2,000 sq. ft. townhome unit <br /> <br />Residential – Multi-family (Rental Apartments and Condominiums): Alternatives <br />As previously noted, market conditions for the construction of multi-family projects are <br />extremely challenging at present. Based on EPS’ analysis, under current conditions there is no <br />capacity to increase fees, since development costs, in general, including fees under today’s <br />rates, cannot produce financially feasible projects. With this in mind, two alternatives are <br />proposed, with Alternative 2 having two sub-options: <br /> <br />Page 216 of 893
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.