Laserfiche WebLink
APPENDIX D <br /> <br /> PLEASANTON RESPONSE TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND <br /> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LETTER, DATED MARCH 20, 1996 <br /> <br />The attached letter (Appendix C) regarding the 1996 Pleasanton Housing Element Update was <br />received from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on <br />March 20, 1996. The City of Pleasanton's responses are presented below in the order raised <br />in the HCD staff letter. With the addition of the information contained in the accompanying <br />documents, the Housing Element should be in compliance with Article 10.6 of the California <br />Government Code. <br /> <br />A. REVIEW AND REVISION <br /> <br />A program-by-program evaluation of the housing programs contained in the current (1992) <br />Housing Element has been prepared and is included in Appendix B of the Draft 1996 Housing <br />Element Supplement. This evaluation identifies and discusses the manner in which the draft <br />Element's housing goals, policies, and programs have been revised to reflect the City's <br />experiences in implementing those contained in the proposed Element update. <br /> <br />B. HOUSING NEEDS, RESOURCES, AND CONSTRAINTS <br /> <br />1. Appendix E of the Supplement contains a description and analysis of Pleasanton's land <br /> use controls. This includes the City's regulations relating to housing density, the <br /> Pleasanton Growth Management Program, and other zoning regulations. Based upon this <br /> analysis, we feel that our current policies and procedures do not pose actual constraints <br /> to development. Discussion regarding the low-income housing fee (Housing <br /> Program 11.1) and the inclusionary program (Housing Program 9.5) is included below: <br /> <br /> a. HCD has commented that the City' s plan to revise downward the minimum <br /> density for High Density Residential will not <br /> <br /> "facilitate the development of the remainder of the City's <br /> regional housing need. In addition, given that Pleasanton <br /> has a limited remaining supply of high-density land, such <br /> a redesignation and potential use of high-density land for <br /> low-density development will make it significantly more <br /> difficult for Pleasanton to accommodate its regional need in <br /> the future planning periods." <br /> <br /> <br />