My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-06-25 Development & Transportation
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES
>
DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION (2013-2016)
>
2015
>
2015-06-25 Development & Transportation
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2015 12:51:53 PM
Creation date
12/3/2015 12:51:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
6/25/2015
Destruction Year
P
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
increases. He stated his concern that the ordinance may constrain historic adaptive <br />re -use of buildings and alternatives to construction; and treats new and existing <br />development the same even when economics may vary, which may be an <br />impediment to developers in considering affordable housing. The ordinance does not <br />currently provide options to provide affordable housing units instead of in lieu fees, <br />and limits alternatives that may be considered. Possible modifications were provided <br />in the presentation, including exemptions to projects approved prior to the adoption <br />of the original ordinance; exempt adaptive re -use from the ordinance requirement; <br />provide for off-site construction of units; allow rehabilitation of off-site units; remove <br />Takings Determination; apply the ordinance only to those conversions that exceed <br />the density permitted in the General Plan; allow an in -lieu fee option up to 50 units <br />instead of the current 20 units; simplify the in -lieu fee calculation to $5 per square <br />foot; and re-evaluation of the matter in 3 years. He clarified potential options <br />including modification of the existing ordinance; or a short moratorium to prepare <br />another ordinance and establish an interim ordinance; or do nothing. <br />Councilmember Benavides noted that quality, accessible and mixed income housing <br />is important, and appreciates staff's efforts to modify issues. He suggested <br />incentives to developers that propose mixed income developments. Councilmember <br />Martinez called attention to the county's changing demographics and that people are <br />leaving due to transportation and housing affordability; and specified that the needs <br />of the community must be taken into consideration. Mayor Pro Tem Sarmiento <br />clarified that inquiries from the community are always welcome, noting that the city <br />has a responsibility to residents and also to developers to ensure that working <br />families have a dignified way to live, considering the high housing costs throughout <br />the county. He recommended revisiting the matter within 24 months; summarized <br />that consistency in development fees is important; commented that the goal is <br />quality market rate developments; and that other cities direct their developers' in -lieu <br />funds to projects that are set aside for affordable housing; and he requested that a <br />future report to the City Council include a comparison table of other local cities. This <br />item is scheduled to go before City Council on August 4, 2015. <br />3. THIRD & BROADWAY UPDATE <br />The City Manager provided a high level overview of the project, and he said there <br />were several submissions for this project. Oliver McMillan was invited back to <br />provide their background and experience, but were not interested in providing a hotel <br />component beyond their residential proposal with ground floor retail; and the firm <br />recommended a hotel feasibility study. Direction is currently sought from Committee <br />members, as the only proposal to include a hotel proposal was from Caribou <br />Industries per Mr. Duncan's earlier comments. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Sarmiento noted the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was <br />circulated for a 2nd time; and Larry Kosmont's office was sought to assist with this <br />matter, although the meeting notification was late and the firm was not able to attend <br />this meeting. He reiterated that Caribou Industries was the only submission that <br />included a hotel component pursuant to the RFQ. He recommended that discussions <br />for refinement, terms and conditions proceed with Caribou Industries; and that Larry <br />Kosmont and other possible developers be consulted with a very short timeframe. <br />Development & Transportation Council Committee Minutes 2 June 25, 2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.