HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/12/2002, BUS 6 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE MEETING DATE: 11-12-02 ITEM: BUS/6 RECEIVED
- All
SLO CITY CLERK Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
P.O. Box 12604 . San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 RED FILE
-- ME ING AGENDA
November 10, 2002 DA I( I.A.11TEM # Q��
San Luis Obispo City Council HAND DELIVERED TO COUNCIL MEMBERS
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 E,2ZT
OUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR
AO ❑ FIN DIR
Re: Resolution Establishing A Housing Element Task Force CAO C FIRE CHIEF
Meeting Date: 11-12-02 TTORNEY ❑ PW DIR
Item• Bus/6 LERKiORIG ❑ POLICE CHF
EPT HEADS ❑ REC DIR
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Ci Council, P(Tf�b,�n� ❑ UTIL DIR
Y City
RQN submits the following comments regarding the formation of an ad hoc Housing Element Task
Force:
HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS
The resolution to establish an ad hoc Housing Element Task Force that you are being asked to adopt
begins as follows:
"the City is updating its General Plan Housing Element with the goals of expanding opportunities for
all income groups and complying with state law;"(Emphasis added.]
It is our opinion that these goals are inconsistent with your comments and the direction you gave
staff at the City Council meeting on October 1, 2002 for the following reasons:
1. The thrust of your discussion on housing focused on the critical need to build workforce, low,
and very low income housing, not more housing for above-moderate income groups.
2. Adopting a goal of "complying with state law" carries with it the implication that the task
force will be charged with finding a way to 'incorporate the current State Housing Quota of
5,450 housing units into the Housing Element. This would clearly constrain the ability of the
task force to produce a document that is in the best interest of the residents of the City. To
illustrate this point the attached a letter, dated July 1, 1993 from HCD, describes their
interpretation of what they believe the City should do to comply with state law. If you do not
agree with everything in their interpretation, "complying with state law" should not be stated
as a goal. [Attachment"1"].
It is our recommendation that the goals for the General Plan Housing Element should be restated to
read:
The City is updating its General Plan Housing Element with the goals of expanding
opportunities for work force, low and very low income housing; preserving the character
of existing R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods; and devising strategies to help stabilize the
rental/owner ratio in the City's existing neighborhoods.
November 10 2002
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE Page 2
Preserving neighborhood character and devising strategies to help stabilize the rental/owner ratio
are rCauirements of WE 2.15. [Attachment"2" Neighborhood Wellness Plans].
DUTIES OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE
To be consistent with our recommendation to restate the Housing Element goals, the duties of the
task force should be revised as follows:
1. Review and comment on existing and proposed housing policies and programs in an effort
expand opportunities for work force, low and very low income housing.
2. Review and comment on existing and proposed housing policies and programs in an effort to
preserve the character of existing R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods.
3. Review and comment on existing and proposed housing policies and programs in an effort to
help stabilize the rental/owner ratio in the City's existing neighborhoods.
4. Recommend new housing goals, policies, or programs to address community housing needs,
preserve the character of existing R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods, and stabilize the rental/owner
ratio in the City's existing neighborhoods.
5. Review the Draft Housing Element Update.
6. Other duties as assigned by the City Council.
PROCESS FOR UPDATING THE HOUSING ELEMENT
On October 1, 2002 you sent a clear message when you spoke of the importance of "maximizing
neighborhood involvement" to assist in defining the issues. You spoke of"neighborhood buy-in"and
"going into the neighborhoods" to find out what works and.what doesn't. You spoke of the need to
preserve the quality of life of the people who live here now. This is also required by WE 2.15.
MAKEUP OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE
We are disappointed that there has been little change in the overall makeup of the task force
Stakeholder Groupst,, although you gave direction to change it. Unfortunately, the proposed groups
still do not adequately represent residents, even though it is the residents who stand to be impacted
the most. The make up of the task force is still dominated by advocates for new housing
development, institutions, and members who are not City residents.If the balance of this task force
remains skewed it is predictable that their recommendations would do little to stabilize the
rental/owner ratio and preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. No doubt, their
recommendations would be to:
1. Increase the density in the City's existing R-1 neighborhoods.
2. Have the effect of creating new costs for existing residents. (See: previously submitted
Council Agenda Report [8-4-92] describing the costs of meeting the previous State Housing
Quota and the 1994 Telegram Tribune summary of"Meeting the Quota").
November 10, 2002
HOUSING ELEMENT TASK FORCE Page 3
3. Change the City's long term commitment to slow growth.
RON RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Revise the goals of the General Plan Housing Element to be consistent with the direction you
provided on October 1, 2002.
2. Direct that meetings should be held: first, in the residential neighborhoods of the City, to
allow residents to identify problems with existing City housing policies and practices; and
secondly, conduct outreach meetings with "other interested stakeholders".
3. Re-write only those policies and practices in the existing Housing Element that have been
identified as problematic. This would benefit us all by saving a great deal of time.
4. Advocates for residents of the City's existing neighborhoods should be the majority of the
Housing Element task force makeup.
The existing Housing Element states: "The City will encourage residents to play a larger role in
supporting and improving neighborhoods and in addressing housing issues'. [H 7.2.6]. We look to
you to provide the direction make this really happen.
Respectfully submitted,
1.51
s1
Cydney Holcomb
Chairperson, RQN
Attachments - 2
cc: Faxed to City Hall — 781-7109
Planning Commission
_ Attachment moi,•
;TATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS.TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON.Governor
_.rr
:PARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ,tr13
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT ' _
y- '
.S00 THIRD STREET.Boum 430 'b�..ct
?.O BOX.9s2053
;ACR,V%tF-1-T0.CA 942S2.2053
;916) 323.3176 F.A.\(916) 323-6625
July 1; 1993
Mr. John Dunn
City Manager -
city of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo,--Cal-ifornia 93403
Dear Mr. Dunn:
RE: Review of San Luis Obispo' s Draft Housing Element
Thank you for submitting San Luis Obispo' s draft housing
element, received June 1, 1993 for our review. As you know, we
are. recuired to review draft housing elements and report our
findings to the locality (Government Code Section 65585 (b) ) .
Identified concerns were reviewed in a telephone
conversation on June 24 , 1993 with Jeff Hook, the City's Project
Planner. This letter and Appendix contain a summary of that
discussion.
The draft element contains much useful information about the
City' s housing environment and outlines an extensive arrav Of
policies and programs. However, revisions are needed for the
element to comply with State housing element law (Article 10. 6 of
the Government Code) .
In particular, the element should clarify the availability
of adea_uate sites to accommodate the City' s regional housing
needs, include programs to address the City' s constraints on
housing development, and include more specific program actions.
The Appendix to this letter outlines these and other revisions ---
needed to bring the element into compliance:-
We appreciate the City's efforts to work cooperatively with
the Department to bring its housing element into compliance with
state law. We remain committed to helping the City develop a
housing element which addresses all of its housing needs and
enables the City to receive Community Development Block Grant
Funding to address those needs. We will be happy to meet with
the City again to provide additional direct assistance to the
City in revising its programs and policies to comply with State
law.
Mr. John Dunn
Page 2
We hope our comments are helpful to the City and we
appreciate the assistance of Mr. Hook during the course of our
review. If you have any questions concerning our comments, or
..would like .assistance in. revisina. the element, please contact
-:- j_SaxY__LCo1.16rd of our.*staff at (916) 327-2644 .
In accordance with requests pursuant to the Public- Records
Act, we are forwarding copies of this letter to the persons and
organizations- listed below.
Sincerely,
V
Thomas B. Cook
Deputy Director
Enclosures
cc: Assemblymember Andrea Seastrand
Senator Gary Hart
Peg Pinard, Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
Debbi Hosli, Administrative Analyst, City of San Luis Obispo
Arnold Jonas, Director of Community Development, City of San
Luis Obispo
Jeff Hook, Project Planner, City of San Luis Obispo
Jeanette Duncan, Peoples' Self-Help Housing
Kathleen Mikkelson, Deputy Attorney General
Bob Cervantes, Governor' s Office of Planning and Research
Dwight Hanson, California Building Industry Association
Kerry Harrington Morrison, California Association of
-Realtors
--` •—Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation_
Rob Wiener, California Coalition for Rural Housing
Susan DeSantis, The Planning Center
Dara Schur, Western Center on Law Poverty
APPENDIX
city of San Luis Obispo
The following changes would bring San Luis Obispo's housing
element into compliance with Article 10. 6 of the Government Code.
Following each recommended change or addition, we refer- t4 the
applicable provision of the Government Code. Where particular
program examples or data sources are listed, these suggestions
are for your information only. We recognize that the City may
choose other means of complying with the law.
'A. Housing 2deeds; Resourdes and constraints
1. Identify the City's projected regional housing needs for all income groups
(Section 65583 (a)(1)). - -The City' s projected housing needs, as reported in the
1991 Regional Housing Reeds Plan for the San Luis
Obispo City Region, for the planning period (January 1,
1991 to July 1, 1997) are as follows:
Very Low 1,333 '
Other Lotter 820
Moderate 11077
Above Moderate 1.898
Total 5, 128
2. Clarify the availability of land suitable for residential development for all
urcome groups, including vacant sites and sites !raving potential for
redevelopment, and describe the relationship of zoning and the ovailabiliry of
public services and facilities to the sites (Section 65583(a)(3)).
It is not possible to determine whether the City has
sufficient sites available to accommodate its housing
needs for all income groups from the analysis provided
in the element (pages 38-44) . While Table 14 clearly
illustrates the amount of vacant residential land in
each zone, it is not clear how much land having infill
(i.e. , sites which are underdeveloped) or recycling
_ (i.e. , sites with older or decaying uses) potential is
� - also available in each zone. To clarify this, Table 14
could include- a separate column which identifies the
amount of land having infill or recycling potential in
each zone.
The inventory should also specify the permitted
development density range. of each zone permitting
residential development and indicate expected
development densities based upon recent development
trends or on the basis of identified slope constraints.
This information should be provided for vacant sites
and sites having infill or recycling potential.
Since it appears the City will need to rely upon sites
having re eve o went ao ential to accommodate some of
i E s ousing needs, the element should also demonstrate
t is po en 1al by indicating the net number, type, and
density of units historically created (e.g. , during the
last five years) through infill, recycling of underused
or older residential sites, mixed-use developments, or
the element should estimate future potential based on
programs to encourage and promote such development.
The inventory should also clarify which sites are
located within the CiLy_ (or are proposed for annexation
within the planning .te•r ocj`'"and=-;:aver°-or-w-i11-..-leave;=
access to all of the -essenti'al facilities 'and"'services -- = —'
necessary to support development within the planning
period.
Nccording to Table 6 of the element, the additional
water supplies needed to accommodate the. City's
regional housing needs are expected to be available
towards the end of the current planning period. As a
result, the City could include sites in the expansion
areas in the inventory provided the element includes
specific programs to annex and facilitate the
development of such sites within the planning period.
3 Expand the analysis of the Ciry's land use conrrols, permit fees, and permir ✓
processing procedures; andarmee the City's building codes and enforcement
procedures as gotemdal and acnial voivnimenta cornsrrauntrs upon tie
M-aintenance, irrr rovement, and eve opment of rousMg for all income o0•ouos
ectwn 65583(c)(1)).
a. The analysis of land use controls should be
expanded to describe and analyze zoning and other
land development regulations such as building
setback and height standards, on-site open space
and parking requirements, and design review
requirements for single and multifamily
residential zones.
b. The analysis of permit fees and exactions should
be expanded to describe and analyze permit fee
various residential development
applicdtiofs—('e-.g, "tract map, conditional use
permit, zone change, environmental reviews, etc. ) . -
c. The analysis of permit processing procedures
should be expanded to describe and analyze
discretionary review requirements and typical
processing timelines for various residential
development applications (e.g. , tract maps,
planned developments, conditional use permits,
site plan reviews, environmental reviews, etc. )
2
d. The analysis of building codes and enforcement
/ procedures should describe and analyze any local
✓ amendments to. the uniform building codes and the
city's procedures for identifying and resolving
residential code violations.
Where constraints are identified, the element should
include programs to- mitigate them or, where appropriate
and legally possible, remove them (see item C-2, below)
(Section 65583 (c) (3) ) .
anul.the ana4,sis of the.availability of financing and the cost of
� _ z
conST/tIcaonz IZs.a'poTential or actual riot ovemmental constraint upon_tl_e__
- maintenance, improvement, or development of housvng for all incomegrotcps
(Section 65583 (a)(5)).
a. The analysis of the availability of financing
should describe whether financing is generally
available in all regions of the City and whether
there are mortgage deficient areas in the City for
purchase, new construction, or rehabilitation
loans.
b. The analysis of residential construction costs
should describe typical developer costs for land,
fees, materials, labor and financing for typical
single and multifamily developments.
5. Expand the analysis of the special housing needs of the homeless (Section
65583(a)(6))•
The analysis of the City's homeless population should
include an estimate of the daily average number of
persons and families in the City lacking permanent
shelter. Where possible, the analysis should describe
the characteristics of the local homeless population
(e.g. , single males, single females, families, mentally
111, substance abusers, etc) .
The analysis should also include a count of the number
and type of shelter beds, motel vouchers, or
- - - transitional housing available in the City to establish
whether there is a need for additional shelter
facilities and the types of facilities needeii:-- -- — —
6. Analyze and document household and housbig characteristics including
overpayment and housing stock conditions and expand the anah�sis of
overcrowded housing units (Section 65583 (c)(2)).
The analysis of overpayment should identify the number
and proportion of lower-incomerenter- and owner-
occupied households overpaying for housing. For
3
example, according to the 1990 Census, 89 percent of
all renter households with incomes less than 20, 000 per
year are paying 30 percent or more of their income for
housing (see enclosed data) .
The analysis of overcrowding should be expanded to-
identify the number and proportion of renter- and
owner-occupied housing units which meet the Census
definition of overcrowding (i. e. , one or more persons
••-..:per:-room) . For example, according to the 1990 Census,
she City' s renter .households are
overcrowded compared with 1.4 percent of owner-occupied
households (see enclosed data) .
The analysis of housing stock conditions should
identify the number of units in need of repair
(rehabilitation) and replacement (demolition) .
Where housing needs exist, the element should identify
potential solutions and resources to address the need.
B. Quantified Objectives
Establish the maximum number of housing units that can be cotstructe4
rehabilitated, and conserved by 5:come category during the planning period of the
element (Section 65583 (c)(3)).
Chapter 889, Statutes of 1991, requires that quantified
objectives for new construction, rehabilitation, and
conservation now be estimated by income category (i.e. , very
low-, low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income) . This
information mai be- illustrated in chart form; for example:
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVE
Income Level New Construction Rehab Conservation
Very Low-Income
Low-Income
Moderate-Income
Above. Moderate
While Table 7 summarizes the City' s total housing production
objective for the planning period, the element does not
clearly establish the City's construction objectives for
each income group. While Table 9 is labeled "Projected
-Housing Construction by Income Group" the text explaining
the table indicates that the figures represent housing
construction needs .for each income group proportionate to
the allocation used in the RHNA plan, rather than the City's
construction objective for each income group..
__..•c• Programs -----
1. Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate
zoning and development standards needed to facilitate and encourage the
development of a variety of housing types for all income groups, including
multifamily rental housing factory-built housing mobilehomes, and emergency
shelters and transitional housing. Where the inventory of sites does not identify
adequate sites to accommodate the need for all household income groups
pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for sufficient sites with
zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential use by
right, including density and development standards that could accommodate
and facilitate the feasibility of housbig for very low aqui low-income
households. (Section 65583(c)(1))..
A development density of 25 or more units per acre is
typically needed to accommodate lower—income housing
needs (i. e. very low— and low—income households) . The
development densities of the City's R and certain
commercial zones (e.g. , C-R, C-C, MU) provide
appropriate opportunities for lower-income households.
However, from Table 14, there does not appear to be
enough vacant sites available in these zones to
accommodate the City' s total lower-income need for
2,153 units.
A density of 10 or more units per acre is typically
needed to provide opportunities for moderate-income
households. The City' s R-2 and R-3 zones appear
appropriate- for accommodating this need. According to
Ta75l•e-I4 ,--mere appears to be sufficient vacant sites
-r�- -- -- to accommodate approximately 460 to 770 units (one- and
two-bedroom units) , compared with the total need for
1, 077 moderate-income units.
Table 14 does appear, however, to identify sufficient
sites to accommodate the City's total need for above
moderate-income households. The R-1 zone contains
enough vacant land to accommodate a maximum of 1, 900
units, compared with the need for 1,898 units.
5
Therefore, the element should include programs to
increase the availability of sites, which are
appropriately zoned, to accommodate the City 's lower-
and moderate-income housing needs.
2. Address and, where legally possible, remove governmental constrabas to the
maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income groups
(Section 65583(c)(3)).
The City'•s :Res i dential-C-row-th•Manager+ent-Ordina-nr,.e -_
prevents the accomModation of additional residential
development commensurate with the City's assigned share
—of-the-regional-housing need (see item_A-1,. . above)..__
-According to the element, the Ordinance's one percent
annual growth allowance will allow the City to
accommodate 1,185 additional units during the planning
period. The City estimates that approximately 190
additional units could also be accommodated through
replacement housing construction and by proposed
exemptions for affordable housing units. The City' s
projected housing need for the planning period (January
1991 through July 1997) , however, totals 5, 128 units.
Therefore, the ordinance is serving as a governmental
constraint which should be removed or mitigated. For
example, the City could mitigate or remove the adverse
effects of the ordinance by annexing additional sites
in the expansion areas for residential development and
exempting development on the ite - -
ordinance. a City could also alien the annual growth
owance of the Ordinance with the housing production
. and population growth projections prepared for the City
by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (i.e. , an
annual growth rate approximating 5 percent) .
The City' s proposed inclusionary housing requirements
(Program 1.22 .11) also presents a potential
governmental constraint to the development of large-
scale residential projects and should be._removed or . . ... .
mitigated. As .structured, the prcg_am-wor3-d—i-mpose-a-•-
•50 percent-inclLsionary--requirement (i. e. , 33 percent
lower-income and 17 percent moderate-income) . on
residential development projects of 5o or more units.
Unless much stronger financial incentives or regulatory
incentives are provided, the exceptionally high
inclusionary requirement proposed under this program is
likely to constrain the development of housing in the
expansion areas proposed for annexation.
6
The City should modify its inclusionary ordinance
and/or other development standards. For example, a 25%
inclusionary requirement (with 15% lower-income and 10%
moderate-income) , combined with density bonus or other
development concessions would be less likely to
constrain residential develo-oment.
The existence of other potential or actual governmental
constraints, and the adequacy of City efforts to
mtigate_ them, cannot-be determined in the absence of a
_-_`-complete discussion .a2d determinat_on of cotentizl
constraints (see item A-3, above) .
3 . Programs should include specific timelines for implementation and identify the
City depatriment or--viaividual responsible for implementation (Section 65.183
(c))•
All of the City' s programs lack this information.
4 . Most of the programs should include more specific implementation actions
and demonstrate a greater commitment toward implementation to ensure that
the City can meet housing element program requirements (Section 65583(c)(1-
6)).
All program descriptions should be as detailed as
possible, specifying the objectives of the program,
funding sources and costs, and the steps to be taken by
the locality to implement the programs. Example,
include but are not limited to:
Program 1.22. 14 : When will the City adopt procedures
to expedite development permits?
What amount of reduction in average
processing time is expected? How
many projects or units are expected
to be assisted during the planning
period? What kinds of affordable
housing projects are eligible; does
it include development projects
sucj ect_to�Pr_per_am_l:'22.'11?
Program 1.23 .7 : When will the dity •establish a * ""
housing rehabilitation program?
What amount of CDBG funding will be
allocated for this purpose? How
many units does the City expect to
assist during the planning period?
The evaluation of the previous housing element's
programs (pages 59-61) indicates that the City was
unsuccessful in implementing many of the programs.
7
Several programs were not fully implemented or failed
to meet intended objectives (e.g. , programs 2, 4', 51 81
and 11) . Many other programs (programs 13-32) are not
included in the evaluation and, therefore,, it is not
possible to determine whether these programs were
successfully implemented. Development of strong
programs which clearly articulate the City's policies
and commitment to address local need and State law will
. ensure that San Luis Obispo will be more successful
- - during the current planning period.
"- As you :=;ay-know,—C-overnment Code Section 65400 requires
each city and county planning agency to provide an
annual report to its legislative body on the status of
-- -" the local general plan and the progress in its -
implementation. Chapter 144.1,. Statutes of 1990 added
that this annual report must also include the
locality's progress in meeting its share of regional
housing needs (for each income group) determined
pursuant to Section 65584. Chapter 889, Statutes of
1991 now requires that a copy of this report be
submitted to the Department of Housing and Community
Development within 30 days of its receipt by the local
legislative body.
The City should establish a system for monitoring the
City' s progress in meeting its regional housing needs
and implementing housing element program actions. The
City' s ability to effectively monitor program progress
during the planning period, and make appropriate
modifications, depends upon clear and measurable
program objectives. Therefore, the City should ensure
that its programs contain sufficient information to
make annual monitoring possible.
To assist the City in revising all of its programs, 'we
have enclosed excerpts of successful programs with
clear objectives and commitment from other localities.
We would also be happy to provide assistance to City
staff to facilitate program revisions.
5. Include additional p%rams which assist the development of adequate housu1g----"
to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households (Section 65583
(c)(2)), and conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable
housing stock (Section 65583 (c)(4)).
Following clarification of the City's commitment to
implement proposed housing element programs and program
objectives (see items C-3 and C-4 above) , the City may
need to include additional programs to assist the
development and conservation/rehabilitation of
affordable housing.
8
6. Include an equal housing opporrwzLy program (Section 63583 (c)(5)).
A local equal housing opportunity program should
provide some means for the resolution of housing
discrimination complaints and should be promoted-
throughout the community. In smaller localities, this
may be limited to distributing information on fair
housing laws, and referring complaints to the district
office of the State Department of Fair :EnnlMR t_ and__
_ Housing or other public or nonprofit agerici-�es`=ernv-i-_iped'=�_==
to handle housing discrimination complaints:
D. Preservation of Subsidized Housing -' - -----"—" `
Pursuant to Chapter 1451, Statutes of 1989, expand the
an of assisted multifamily housing developments that
are eligible to change to non-low-income housing uses within
ten years of the housing element update (July 1, 1992) due
to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or
exairation of use restrictions (Section 65583 (a) (8) ) .
1. Include a cost analysis of the following:
• The cost of preserving all of the project units at
risk of losing affordability controls ; and
• The cost of producing or replacing the units with
new rental housing with compatible unit size and
rent levels (Section 65583 (a) (8) (B) ) .
Costs can be combined for all of the units at .risk
within the planning period; detailed cost analysis or
project appraisals, are not necessary. If it is not
possible to reliably estimate preservation costs, it is
permissible to describe whether such costs are .
anticipated to be higher or lower than replacement
estimates, and the magnitude of the difference between
preservation and replacement costs. .
__ - -- '2-. ExDaednd-'the analysis of financing . sources-whicn could'-Ee'-
u -
sto preserve units at risk of conversion during the
planning period. The analysis should identify the
amount of funding which could be made available from
the funding sources identified (i.e. , CDBG funds,
mortgage revenue bond proceeds, or the housing trust
fund) (Section 65583 (a) (8) (D) ) .
3 . Establish quantified objectives for the number of at-
risk units to be preserved during the planning period
of the element (Section 65583 (b) ) .
9
Ideally, preservation objectives will equal the number
of units at risk, however, the statute acknowledges
that when a locality has determined that the potential
preservation need exceeds available resources,
objectives may be less than anticipated needs. Under
these circumstances, the element should include the
analysis used to establish the maximum preservation
objective.
4: . ==Eden{.-pry=p�ogram:ac£aons1f==preserving units: at risk
-.of conversion duringthe-pl'anni-ng-period--?rogzam�----- -... . -
actions should utilize the funding sources identified
in itemD-2, above, except where the City has
---- -iderrcrFsed-•other• (more urgent)-needs-for-t.hese funding
sources (Section 65583 (c) (6) ) .
The element should include programs which clearly
describe the specific actions or steps the City will
take to preserve at-risk projects, including timelines
and the funding sources to be used. Actions might
range from regulatory and technical assistance measures
to providing direct financial participation
(loans/grants for acquisition and rehabilitation) to
preserve the at-risk units. Program actions should be
appropriately tailored to the kinds of projects at risk
(e.g. , local versus federal projects) .
It is also appropriate to describe the City's
responsibility for reviewing plans of action submitted
for LIHPRHA-eligible projects and advising tenants of
available assistance (see pages 23-25 of the enclosed
technical assistance paper: Housing Element Analv_ s3s:
Preservation of Assisted Units.
10
Attachment "2"
General Plan - Adopted: August 23, 1994
Land Use Element
PROGRAMS
LU 2.15: Neighborhood Wellness Action Plans
To help residents preserve and enhance their neighborhoods, the City will:
A) Identify neighborhoods, and work with residents to prepare neighborhood
plans that empower them to shape their neighborhoods;
B) Help devise strategies to help stabilize the rental/owner ratio, to maintain
neighborhood character, safety, and stability;
C) Help identify neighborhood problems, and undertake a wide range of
focused development-review, capital-improvement, and code-enforcement
efforts;
D) Encourage the formation of voluntary neighborhood groups, so residents
can become involved early in the development review process;
E) Involve residents early in reviewing proposed public and private projects
that could have neighborhood impacts, by notifying residents and property
owners and holding meetings at convenient times and places within the
neighborhoods.
F) Provide appropriate staff support, possibly including a single staff person
for neighborhood issues, and train all staff to be sensitive to issues of
neighborhood protection and enhancement.