HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/16/2004, PH6 - DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Council "'gyp°"° 3-16-04
acEnaa RepoRt
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Mandeville, Director of Community D v ment
Prepared By: Jeff Hook, Associate PI
SUBJECT: DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1) Approve the Council's changes to Chapter 3 of Draft Housing Element, 2) Review and
conceptually approve the amended Inclusionary Housing Requirements, or provide alternative
direction, 3) Review Chapter 4, and review and finalize changes to the Council Hearing Draft
Housing Element, with direction to staff to bring back the amended Council Hearing Draft for .
adoption at the Council's March 30, 2004 special meeting.
DISCUSSION
Overview
On March 1, Council completed its review of Chapter 3 of the Draft Housing Element and continued
consideration of the rest of the document to March 16th. Council endorsed a tentative review
schedule for March as follows:
Tuesday, March 16`" (Regular meeting)
I. Complete review of revised Chapter 3, incorporating Council's changes(Attachment 1);
2. Review Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Tables 2 and 2A;
3. Review Chapter 4, Quantified Objectives.
4. Review Appendices, including Glossary definitions of "infill" and "underutiltized". .
(Attachment 2).
5. Preliminary review of General Plan consistency.
Tuesday,March 23 (Special meeting if needed)
1. Complete review of Appendices.
Tuesday,March 30 (Special meeting)
1. Findings (including internal General Plan consistency determination)
2. Resolution for Housing Element adoption.
Council Review
Chapter 3 has been revised to include Council's changes (Attachment 1). Added language is shown
as underlined: deleted text is shown in stAwAiA
text. The Inclusionary Housing Requirement, Table
2, has been revised in response to the Mundie and Associates Report and to clarify the Table.
Changes are as follows:
1. In-lieu fees were increased to 10% for in-city residential and all commercial developments.
b - I
i
Draft Housing Element Update, March 16,2004 Council Meeting Page 2
This raises the in-lieu fee from its current rate of 2%of building valuation to 10%. The Mundie and
Associates analysis of Affordable Housing Requirements concluded that the proposed 5% in-lieu fee
proposed in the Draft Housing Element would result in most developers choosing to pay a fee rather
than build affordable housing. The in-lieu fee is considerably less than the actual cost of building an
affordable dwelling. The proposed 10% rate is intended to approximate the cost of building
affordable dwellings, and will hopefully encourage production over payment of in-lieu fees. For
commercial developments where construction of housing or dedication of real property for housing
are not possible, the higher in-lieu fee means that business will shoulder greater responsibility in
meeting affordable housing needs resulting from basic employment growth.
Higher in-lieu fees will likely increase development costs. If the proposed Table 2A or a similar
"sliding" scale is approved, however, developers may reduce Inclusionary Housing Requirements
significantly by building smaller, more compact housing. Small residential and commercial
developments are already exempt. Under Table 2A, housing developments with average floor areas
of 1,500 square feet or less can reduce their:requirement by a factor of%2 or less.
The Planning Commission supported Table 2A as a way to "incentivize" the Inclusionary Housing
Program and to promote compact housing that could be "affordable by design." Each non-exempt
residential project would still be required to provide at least one enforceably-restricted affordable
unit. This approach encourages the private sector to shoulder a larger responsibility in meeting
affordable housing need. It assumes smaller dwellings will be relatively more affordable than larger
ones. To the extent housing costs are determined, in part, by floor area and size of lot, this
assumption should hold true. There would be no guarantee, however, that such dwellings would be
affordable for low- and moderate income persons. It would likely result in fewer enforceably-
restricted, affordable units being produced, but would promote General Plan housing and land use
objectives by increasing housing variety and price ranges. If adopted,the program will be monitored
and evaluated to determine whether it produces the intended results.
2. A note was added to clarify that for non-exempt residential developments, at least one
enforceably-restricted,affordable dwelling is required.
The Inclusionary Housing Requirement has, since adoption, included this provision..
Notwithstanding Table 2A, all non-exempt residential developments would be required to provide at
least one enforceably-restricted, affordable dwelling for low-or moderate income households.
3. Table 2 has been simplified, and notes added to clarify that developments of 4 or less
dwellings or 2,500 square feet of commercial floor area are exempt from Inclusionary
Housing Requirements,and to clarify options for meeting the Requirement.
These are simply graphic changes to facilitate use of the Tables and to clarify exemptions "up front"
In addition, a definition of"underutilized" has been added to the Glossary, Appendix M (Attachment
2). It is defined as "Sites or buildings that may be further developed under the City of San Luis
Obispo's Zoning Regulations and that are served by streets and public utilities." To meet State law
and HCD requirements, the City conducted a detailed inventory of its land resources to document
that, in theory, the City had an adequate supply of appropriately zoned land to meet its assigned
Regional Housing Need. In this context, "underutilized" refers to a parcel's ability to legally
accommodate additional dwellings under City standards, but the term is for statistical purposes and
lY
Draft Housing Element Update,March 16,2004 Council Meeting Page 3
not intended as a development or growth objective.
Quantified Objectives in the Draft Housing Element Update
As required by State law, the Draft Housing Element Update includes Quantified Objectives showing
the number of new dwelling units the City will be able to accommodate in each income group during
the planning period from January 1, 2001 to July 1, 2009 (See Table 5, page 48 of the Council
Hearing Draft. Of these, 2,167 units are targeted for very-low and low-income households.
These objectives are based on the City's Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA), adjusted to
reflect the City's water supply constraints during the planning period. The Quantified Objectives
also set rehabilitation, preservation, and conservation objectives. These numbers are not tied to an
allocation,but are based on a realistic assessment of available funding and development patterns.
State HCD reviews the quantified objectives closely to determine whether a housing element meets
State law. Although the City's Quantified Objectives are theoretically possible,they are not specific
development quotas. The Draft Element emphasizes the City cannot guarantee these objectives will
be met, given limited financial resources, economic uncertainty, and independent development
decisions. Attainment of the objectives rests largely on private development decisions and the City's
ability to leverage Federal, State or local funding to help meet very-low, low, and moderate income
housing needs.
Preliminary General Plan Consistency Issues
Staff will provide the Council with a summary of General Plan consistency issues prior to the March
16th meeting. At the time of this writing, it appears the main consistency issue involves wording
differences between adopted and proposed policies that have the same intent. Also, the existing .
definition of"infill" in the Land Use Element(LUE) differs from the Draft Housing Element, in that
the LUE definition refers to the development of vacant, in-city parcels, whereas the Draft Housing
Element broadens the definition to include both vacant and underutilized in-city parcels. This is
similar to the definition of"infill"that HCD uses. The broader definition helps demonstrate to HCD
that the City has the sufficient land resources to theoretically meet our Regional Housing Needs
allocation and thus, achieve certification. If the City's definition of infill is not expanded to include
underutilized parcels in the City, the Housing Element Update should include explicit references to
"underutilized parcels" to address the issue that HCD is looking for. Furthermore, the General Plan
should have one, inclusive glossary to avoid differences between individual elements. Staff will
consolidate all of the General Plan glossaries into one as a part of the final resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Revised Ch. 3 of the Council Hearing Draft Housing Element
2. Excerpts from the Draft Housing Element Glossary,Appendix M
1:UHOOM14ousing Elemem Update\CAR2-24-04CHEupdate.doc
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
chapteR 3 [RCVIS661
coals, policies ana pizocaams
3.10 Overview
This chapter of the Housing Element includes the City's Housing Implementation Plan for the
period January 2001 to July 2009. The following goals, policies and programs are based on an
assessment of the City's needs, opportunities and constraints; an evaluation of its existing
policies and programs; and community input from the Housing Element Update Task Force,
community groups,public hearings, workshops and correspondence.
3.20 Summary of New Programs
Higher housing costs, population growth, and the State's economic recession are making it far
more difficult for many households to meet their housing needs today than in the mid-1990s.
Consequently, San Luis Obispo's housing strategy has expanded to meet those needs by:
• Exempting housing affordable to moderate income households, and housing in the
Downtown Core, from Residential Growth Management Regulations.
• Providing incentives to encourage developers to build more affordable compact rental
and ownership housing.
• Initiating rezoning of several areas suitable for higher density, infill housing.
• Establishing a "First-time Homebuyers Program" to assist low- and moderate-income
households in purchasing a home.
• Using a combination of State and Federal grants, affordable housing funds, density
bonuses and other incentives, accommodate development of 4,087 dwellings during
the planning period from January 1, 2001 to July 1, 2009.
• Amending the City's Affordable Housing Standards to lower rent levels for dwellings
intended to be affordable for moderate-income households and individuals.
• Using Section 108 Federal guaranteed loan funds and other funding sources, initiate
development of a major downtown mixed-use project with both affordable and
market-rate housing.
• Requiring most new multi-story buildings in the Downtown Core to provide housing
above the ground floor.
23
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
• Providing special incentives to encourage downtown residential development, and
instituting more flexible parking requirements for specified housing developments
where alternative parking/transportation strategies exist.
• Seeking new funding sources to help defray City development review and impact fees
for developers of very low-, low- and moderate-income housing.
• Reducing obstacles to the production of small residential projects by exempting the
construction, remodeling or relocation of most developments of four dwellings or less
from Architectural Review Commission review.
• Promoting mixed-use development, infill residential development, and more compact,
higher density housing where appropriate.
This strategy combines requirements and incentives to increase production of both affordable and
market-rate housing over the next four and a half years.
Like many small cities with only limited public funds for housing, the City has relied on the
private sector to meet a portion of its affordable housing needs. Increasingly, local governments
are finding it necessary to assist developers if adequate housing is to be built at prices that
citizens can afford. Across the U.S., it has become apparent that the most effective programs
involve cooperative public/private efforts to produce affordable housing. This requires that the
City take a more active role in planning, funding and promoting affordable housing than has.been.
its practice. This Housing Element update builds upon programs introduced in 1994 to promote
affordable housing and expands incentives for affordable housing construction. For example,
using Community Development Block Grant funds, the City has established a Housing Programs
Specialist position to actively support affordable housing by soliciting grants, loans, and other
fomes of assistance.
330 Goals, Policies and Programs
This chapter describes the City's housing goals, policies and programs, which together form the
blueprint for housing actions during the seven and one-half year period covered by this Element.
Goals, policies and programs are listed in top-to-bottom order, with goals at the top and being the
most general Statements, working down to programs, the most specific Statements of intent.
Here is how the three levels of policy differ:
❑ Goals are the desired results that the City will attempt to reach over the long term. They are
general expressions of community values or preferred end states, and therefore, are abstract in
nature and are rarely fully attained. While it may not be possible to attain all goals during
this Element's planning period, they will, nonetheless, be the basis for City policies and
actions during this period.
24
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
❑ Policies are specific statements that will guide decision-making. Policies serve as the
directives to designers, decision makers and others who will initiate or review new
development projects. Some policies stand alone as directives, but others require that
additional actions be taken. These additional actions are listed under "programs" below.
Most policies have a time frame that fits within this Element's planning period. In this
context, "shall" means the policy is mandatory; "should" or "will" indicate the policy should
be followed unless there are compelling or contradictory reasons to do otherwise.
❑ Programs are the core of the City's housing strategy. These include on-going programs,
procedural changes, general plan changes, rezonings or other actions that help achieve
housing goals. Programs translate goals and policies into actions.
Goal 1.1 Safety. Providing safe;decent shelter for all residents.
1.2 Policies
1.2.1 Assist those citizens unable to obtain safe shelter on their own.
1.2.2 Support and inform the public about fair housing laws and programs that allow equal
housing access for all city residents.
1.2.3 Maintain a level of housing code enforcement sufficient to correct unsafe, unsanitary
or illegal conditions and to preserve the inventory of safe housing.
1.3 Programs
L3.1 Provide financial assistance to very-low, low- and moderate-income homeowners and
renters for the rehabilitation of approximately 45 rental housing units and 45 single-
family or mobile home units using Federal, State and local housing funds, such.as
Community Develonment Block Grant Funds.
1.3.2 As staffing and AwAing levels allew, Continue code enforcement to expedite the
removal of illegal or unsafe dwellings, to eliminate hazardous site or property
conditions, and resolve chronic building safety problems.
1.3.3 Enact a Rental Inspection Program to improve the condition of the City's housing
stock.
1.3.4 As-f;Hndtxg e4leContinue to support local and regional solutions to homelessness
by funding programs such as the SLO Homeless Shelter and Prado Day Center for
Homeless Persons.
1.3.5 Create an educational campaign for owners of older residences informing them of
25
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element, March 16,2004
ways to reduce the seismic hazards commonly found in such structures, and
encouraging them to undertake seismic upgrades.
Goal 2.1 Affordability. Accommodate affordable housing production_ that helps meet the
City's Quantified Objectives.
2.2 Policies
2.2.1 Income Levels For Affordable Housing. For purposes of this Housing Element,
affordable housing is that which is obtainable by a household with a particular
income level, as further described in the City's Affordable Housing Standards.
Housing affordable to Very-low, Low, and Moderate-income persons or.households
shall be considered"affordable housing." Income levels are defined as follows:
Very low: 50%or less of County median household income.
Low: 51%to 80% of County median household income.
Moderate: 81%to 120%of County median household income.
Above moderate: 121%or more of County median household income.
2.2.2 Index of Affordability. The Index of Affordability shall be whether the monthly
cost of housing fits within the following limits:
❑ For very low- and low-income households, not more than 25%of monthly income.
❑ For moderate-income households, not more than 30%of monthly income.
❑ For above-moderate income households, no index.
These indices may be modified or expanded if the State of California modifies or
expands its definition of affordability for these income groups.
2.2.3 For housing to qualify as "affordable" under the provisions of this Element, guarantees
must be presented that ownership or rental housing units will remain affordable for the
longest period allowed by State law, or for a shorter period under an equity-sharing or
rehabilitation agreement with the City.
2.2.4 Encourage housing production for all financial strata
of the City's population, in the proportions shown in the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation, for the 2001 — 2009 planning period. The proportions shall be: very low
income, 34 %; low income, 19 %; moderate income, 20 %; above moderate income,
27 %.
26 n
Lo l
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
23 Programs
2.3.1 Amend the Inclusionary Housing Regulations to require that new residential
subdivisions and residential development projects meet the inclusionary requirement
by: 1) building the required affordable housing on- or off-site, 2) dedicating real
property, or 3) rehabilitating units with guarantees the units remain affordable,
pursuant to the Affordable Housing Standards, as shown in Tables 2 and 2A, and as
further described in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Table 2
Indmionary Housing Requirement
Type of Development Project'
Residential-Adiust base requirement per Table 2A Commercial
Build 3% low or 5% moderate income east Build 2 ADUs per acre, but not less
Affordable Dwelling Units (ADUs'), but not less than than 1 ADU per project;
E 1 ADU per project;
a ora Or
(j pay in-lieu fee equal to 10 3% of building valuation.'
pay in-lieu fee equal to 103% of
building valuation.
o
Build 5% low-and 10% moderate income eese Build 2 ADUs per acre, but not less
QADUs, but not less than 1 ADU per project; than 1 ADU per project;
C
.y
or or
c
pay in-lieu fee equal to 15% of building valuation. pay.in-lieu fee equal to 10 3% of
building valuation.
'Residential developments of four or less dwellings, and commercial developments of 2.500 gross square feet of
floor area or less are exempt from these Inclusionary Housing Requirements.
'Affordable Dwelling Units must meet City affordability criteria listed in Goal 2.1.
'Developer may build affordable housing in the required amounts, pay in-lieu fee based on the above formula, or
dedicate real property, or a combination of these, to City approval.
'"Building Value" shall mean the total value of all construction work for which a permit would be issued, as
determined by the Chief Building Official using the Uniform Building Code.
27 0
6
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
TABLE 2A
Project Inclusionary Housing Requirement
Density Adjustment Factor
ty
(Densi
(De s ty Average Unit Size (sq. ft.)
UniAcre)' Up to 1,201-1,500 1,501-2000 2,001-2,500 2,501- >3,000
1,200 3,000
36 or more 0 0 .75 1 1.25 1.5
24-35.99 0 0 .75 1.25 1.25 1.5
12-23.99 0 .25 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
7-11.99 0 .5 1 1.5 1.5 1.75
<7 0 .5 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
Including allowed density bonus,where applicable.
ZMultiply the total base Inclusionary Housing Requirement(either housing or in-lieu percentage) by the adjustment
factor to determine requirement. At least one enforceable-restricted affordable unit is required per development of .
five or more units.
2.3.2 Maintain a city housing fund to be used to develop affordable housing units and
acquire land for affordable housing projects. To qualify for such public assistance,
the development of affordable units must include guarantees the units will remain
affordable for the longest period allowed by State law. Inclusionary housing in-lieu
fees will be placed into this fund.
2.3.3 Review existing and proposed building and planning policies regulations to determine
whether there are changes possible that could assist the production of affordable
housing but that do not conflict with other General Plan policies. Such periodic
reviews will seek to remove regulations that are no longer needed.
2.3.4 Adopt permit streamlining procedures to speed up the processing of applications and
construction permits for affordable housing projects. City staff and commissions
should give such projects priority in allocating work assignments, scheduling,
conferences and hearings, and in preparing and issuing reports.
2.3.5 Review existing and proposed building and planning policies and regulations to
encourage "green building technology", and to allow construction of personalized,
unconventional housing types that reduce cost and/or energy and materials
consumption relative to conventional construction, provided that residential quality
and safety can be maintained.
28
I n r�
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
2.3.6 Pursue outside funding sources for the payment of City impact fees so that new
dwellings that meet the City's affordable housing standards can mitigate their facility
and service impacts without adversely affecting housing affordability.
2.3.7 To the extent outside funding sources can be identified to offset impacts on the City
funds Geae> d, exempt dwellings that meet the moderate income, Affordable
Housing Standards from planning, building and engineering development review and
permit fees, including water meter installation fee. Retain current exemptions for
very-low and low-income households.
2.3.8 Help coordinate public and private sector actions to encourage the development of
housing that meets the City's housing needs.
2.3.9 Assist with the issuance of bonds, tax credit financing, loan underwriting or other
financial tools to help develop or preserve affordable units through various programs,
including, but not limited-to: (1) below-market financing and (2) subsidized
mortgages for very-low, low- and moderate-income persons and first-time home
buyers, and (3) self-help or"sweat equity"homeowner housing.
2.3.10 Amend Affordable Housing Standards to modify the method for calculating
maximum moderate-income rental costs, so that moderate-income rents are
proportionately consistent with rental costs for very low- and low-income renters, to
the extent allowed by State and Federal law.
2.3.11 Amend develepment sods-te-anew- 41fli4s (#gFamy gats") en
.
2.3.11 In conjunction with the Housing Authority and other local housing agencies, provide
on-going technical assistance and education to tenants, property owners and the
community at large on the need to preserve at-risk units as well as the available tools
to help them do so.
Goal 3.1 Housing Conservation. Conserve existing the housing sseel£and prevent the loss
of safe a€€ r-dable housing and the displacement of current occupants.
3.2 Policies
3.2.1 Encourage the rehabilitation, remodeling or relocation of sound or rehabitateable
housing rather than demolition. Demolition of non-historic housing may be permitted
where conservation of existing housing would preclude the achievement of other
housing objectives or adopted City goal's.
29
� �- lD
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
3.2.2 Discourage the removal or replacement of housing affordable to very-low, low- and
moderate income households by higher-cost housing, and avoid permit approvals,
municipal actions or public projects that remove or adversely impact such ft&fdable
housing, unless such actions are necessary to achieve General Plan objectives and: (1)
it can be demonstrated that rehabilitation of lower-cost units at risk of replacement is
financially or physically infeasible, or (2) an equivalent number of new units
comparable or better in affordability and amenities to those being replaced are
provided, or (3) the project will correct substandard, blighted or unsafe housing; and
(4)replacement will not adversely affect a designated historic resource.
3.2.3 Encourage seismic upgrades of older dwellings to reduce the risk of bodily harm and
the loss of.housing.in an earthquake.
3.2.4. Encourage the construction, preservation, rehabilitation or ead expansion of residential
hotels, group homes, integrated community apartments, and ethei:Pypes e$single-room
occupancy dwellings.
3.2.5 Preserve historic homes and other historic residential buildings, historic districts and
unique or landmark neighborhood features.
3.2.6 Preserve the fabric, amenities, setbacks and overall character.and quality of life of
established neighborhoods:
33 Programs
3.3.1 When the City finds affordable unit removal is necessary in connection with a
municipal project, it shall help displaced residents find affordable replacement housing
and assist with relocation costs.
3.3.2 When the City permits private development projects that displace affordable housing,
it will require the developer to assist displaced residents find affordable local
replacement housing. Such measures may include: first priority in purchasing or
renting new affordable dwellings to be developed on-site, assistance with relocation
costs, or other financial measures.
3.3.3 Evaluate, and where necessary, revise building, zoning and fire code requirements
which discourage housing and encourage the conversion of housing to other uses.
3.3.4 Using State or Federal grant funds such as Community Development Block Grants, or
30
lS - I �
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
other funding sources, the City will establish a housing rehabilitation program
offering low-cost loans or other rehabilitation assistance to those who cannot afford or
obtain conventional financing. The purposes of the program shall be to remove
unsafe, unsanitary or illegal conditions, maintain safe housing, and preserve
neighborhoods.
3.3.5 To Preserve the number of dwellings lig in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone) and
the Downtown Planning Area by adopting the G45;%ill adept a "no net housing loss"
program by amending the Downtown Housing Conversion Permit ordinance. The
amendment shall ensure that within each area, the number of dwellings removed shall
not exceed the number of dwellings added en an e&ea %ide basis
3.3.6 Identify residential properties and districts eligible for local, State or Federal listing
and prepare guidelines and standards to help property owners repair, rehabilitate and
improve properties in a historically and architecturally sensitive manner.
3.3.7 To encourage housing rehabilitation, amend the Affordable Housing Standards to
allow a reduced term of affordability for rehabilitated units, to the extent allowed by .
State or Federal law, with a minimum term of but net less th three years and in
proportion to the level of City assistance.
-3.3.8 Establish a monitoring and early warning system to track affordable housing units at-
risk of being converted to market rate housing.
Goal 4.1 Mixed-Income Housing. Preserve and accommodate existing and new mixe&
income neighborhoods and seek to prevent neighborhoods or housing types that are
segregated by economic status.
4.2 Policies
4.2.1 Within newly developed neighborhoods, housing that is affordable to various
economic strata should be intermixed rather than segregated into separate enclaves.
The mix should be comparable to the relative percentages of very-low, low, moderate
and above-moderate income households in the City's quantified objectives.
4.2.2 Include both market-rate and affordable units in apartment and residential
condominium projects and intermix the types of units. Affordable units should be
comparable in appearance and basic quality to market-rate units.
4.2.3 Very low-income housing deveiepinents, such as that developed by the Housing
Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo or other housing providers, may be located
in any zone that allows housing, and should be dispersed throughout the City rather
than concentrated in one neighborhood or zone. In general, 23 dwellings should be
31
( - I
Aftachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
the maximum number of very-low-income units developed on any one site.
4.2.4 In its discretionary actions, housing programs and activities, the City shall
affirmatively further fair housing and promote equal housing opportunities for
persons of all economic segments of the community.
4.3 Program
4.3.1 Review new development proposals for compliance with City regulations and revise
projects or establish conditions of approval as needed to implement the mixed-
income policies.
Goal 5.1 Housing Variety and Tenure. Provide variety in the location,type, size, tenure, .
and style of dwellings.
5.2 Policies
5.2.1 Encourage the integration of appropriately scaled, special-use housing into
developments or neighborhoods of conventional housing.
5.2.2 Encourage mixed-use residential/commercial projects to include live-work and work-
live units where housing, offices or other commercial,uses are compatible.
5.2.3 Encourage the development of housing above ground-level retail stores and offices to
provide housing opportunities close to activity centers and to use land efficiently. .
5.2.4 In general, housing developments of twenty (20) or more units should provide a
variety of dwelling types, sizes or forms of tenure.
5.3 Program
5.3.1 Review new developments for compliance with City regulations and revise projects or
establish conditions of approval as needed to implement the housing variety and
tenure policies.
Goal 6.1 Housing Production. Plan for Genstolet new housing to meet the full range of
community housing needs .
6.2 Policies
6.2.1 Consistent with the growth management portion of its Land Use Element and the
availability of adequate resources, the City will plan to accommodate up to 2,909
32
b I I
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
exempt and non-exempt dwelling units between January 2001 and July 2009. Cal
Poly University intends to provide up to 1,178 housing units on State land during the
planning period.
6.2.2 New commercial. developments in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone) shall include
housing, unless the City makes one of the following findings:
6.2.3
❑ Housing is likely to jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of residents or
employees;
❑ The property's shape, size, topography or other physical factor makes
dwellings infeasible.
6.2.4 If City services must be rationed to new development, residential projects will be
given priority over non-residential projects.
6.2.5 City costs of providing services to housing development will be minimized. Other
than for existing housing programs encouraging housing affordable to very-low and
low income persons, the City will not make new housing more affordable by shifting
costs to existing residents.
hillsides, wetlands, bielegieeA r-esieffl-weeas -And .
6.3 Programs
6.3.1 Amend the General Plan and Residential Growth Management Regulations (SLOMC
17.88) to exempt all new housing in the C-D zone, and new housing in other zones
that is enforceable restricted for Affer-dable4e very low-, low- and moderate- income
households, pursuant to the Affordable Housing Standards. In expansion areas, the
overall number of units built must conform to the city-approved phasing plan.
6.3.2 Amend the Zoning Regulations to allow flexible parking regulations for housing
development, especially in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone) PlaxingAFea, including
the possibility of reduced or no parking requirements where appropriate guarantees
limit occupancies to persons without motor vehicles or who provide proof of
reserved, off-site parking tEmspeftmien
6.3.3 Provide incentives to encourage additional housing in the Downtown Core,
particularly in mixed-use developments. Incentives may include flexible density, use,
height, or parking_provisions, fee reductions, and streamlined development review
and permit processing_ (moved from 6.2.3)
33
co - I4
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
6.3.4 Amend the Parking Management program to promote housing in the Downtown Core
by allowing flexible use of city parking facilities by Downtown residents, where
appropriate. Such use may include requirements for parking use fees, use limitations
and enforcement provisions.
6.3.5 Specific plans for designated Expansion Areas shall include appropriately zoned land
to meet the City's regional housing need for dwellings affordable to very low- and
low-income households, including R-3 and R-4 zoning. These plans shall include
sites suitable for subsidized rental housing and affordable rental and owner-occupied
units. Such sites shall be integrated within neighborhoods of market-rate housing and
shall be architecturally compatible with the neighborhood.
6.3.6 Specific plans shall slued designate sufficient areas at appropriate densities to
accommodate the types of dwellings that would be affordable in the percentages .
called for by this Element. Also, specific plans will include programs to assure that
the affordable dwellings actually will be produced.
6:3.7 Consider Initiate amendments to the General Plan to ead rezone commercial,
manufacturing or public facility zoned areas for residential use, to promote higher-
density, infill or mixed-use housing where growth and land development patterns are
no longer valid and where impact to Low Density Residential areas is minimal
apprepfie#e. For example, areas to be considered for possible rezoning include, but
are not limited to the following sites(shown in Figure 1):
a) Little Italy district and portions of Broad Street corridor
b) Mid-Higuera corridor, between Fontana Avenue and Prado Road
c) 791/861 Orcutt Road
d) West Beth side of Ferrini Road, between Cerro Romauldo and Felton Way
e) 3730 South Higuera Street
f) 1642 Johnson Avenue and 1499 San Luis Drive (rezone vacant and underutilized
school district property)
g) 1030 Southwood Drive
6.3.8 Support regional efforts to establish a countywide affordable housing fund to be
funded through a countywide, dedicated revenue source rather than diverting existing
affordable housing trust funds. The City should manage its Affordable Housing
funds generated through the Inclusionary Housing Program to assist affordable
housing development in the City.
retia fer theprevisien e€ a€€er-dable housing tmits er. m4ped uses. Sueh flexible
sizes,
,
34
Ur ��
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
6.3.9 Balance City efforts to encourage residential development by focusing as much on
infill development and densification within City Limits as on annexation of new
residential land. The City Ail! aeeemplish this by eeasidefiag afaeadmeffts te the
Figure 1
Areas to be Considered for Possible Rezoning
d
f
a
b
rp c_
e
N
A
35
LILP
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
6.3.10 Seek opportunities with other public agencies and public utilities to identify,
assemble, develop, redevelop and recycle surplus land for housing, and to convert
vacant or underutilized public, utility or institutional buildings to housing.
6.3.11 Develop multi-family housing design standards to promote innovative, attractive, and
well-integrated higher-density housing. Developments that meet these standards shall
be eligible for a streamlined level of planning and development review.
Developments that include a significant commitment to affordable housing may also
be eligible to receive density bonuses, parking reductions and other development
incentives, including City financial assistance.
6.3.12 Financially assist in the development of 90 new ownership or rental units affordable
to very-low; low- and moderate-income households during the planning period using
State, Federal and local funding sources.
6.3.13 Actively seek new revenue sources, including State, Federal and private/non-profit.
sources, and financing mechanisms to assist affordable housing development and
first-time homebuyer assistance programs.
6.3.14 Exempt the construction, relocation, rehabilitation or remodeling of up to four
dwellings of up to 1200 square feet each r-esideftfieA upAts from Architectural Review
Commission review:.: New multi-unit housing may be allowed with "Minor or
Incidental" or staff level architectural review, unless the dwellings are located on a .
sensitive or historically significant site.
D at %Gem-
6.3.15 Consider Siete amendments to the Zoning Regulations to increase residential
density limits in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone).
6.3.16 Assist in the production of long-term affordable housing by identifying vacant or
underutilized City-owned property suitable for housing, and dedicate public property,
where feasible and appropriate, for such purposes.
Goal 7.1 Neighborhood Quality. Maintain, preserve and enhance the quality of
neighborhoods, encourage neighborhood stability, and improve neighborhood appearance and
function .
7.2 Policies
7.2.1 Within established neighborhoods, new residential development shall be of a
character, size, density and quality that preserves the neighborhood character and
36
tp ,- I'1
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element, March 16,2004
maintains the quality of life for existing and future residents.
7.2.2 Higher density housing should maintain high quality standards for unit design,
privacy, security, on-site amenities, and public and private open space. Such
standards should be flexible enough to allow innovative design solutions in special
circumstances, e.g. in developing mixed-use developments or in housing in the
Downtown Core.
7.2.3 Within established neighborhoods, iFA4 housing should not be located on sites
designated in the General Plan for parks or open space.
7.2.4 Within expansion areas, new residential development should be an integral part of an
existing neighborhood or should establish a new neighborhood, with pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools and shopping areas.
7.2.5 The creation of walled-off residential enclaves, or of separate, unconnected tracts, is
discouraged because physical separations prevent the formation of safe, walkable,
and enjoyable neighborhoods.
7.2.6 Housing shall be sited desigmd to enhance safety along neighborhood streets and in
other public and semi-public areas.
7.2.7 The nhvsical designs of neighborhoods and dwellings
should promote walking and bicycling, and should preserve open spaces and views.
paFk4ag
7.3 Programs
7.3.1 Implement varied strategies to ensure residents are aware of and able to participate in
planning decisions affecting their neighborhoods early in the planning process.
7.3.2 Identify specific neighborhood needs, problems, trends and opportunities for
improvements. Work directly with neighborhood groups and individuals to address
concerns.
7.3.3 Help fund neighborhood improvements, including sidewalks, traffic calming devices,
crosswalks, parkways, street trees and street lighting to improve the aesthetics, safety
and accessibility .
37
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
,
b.,,eenies, view windews _ f-R-il._F . ,_e (move to LUE 2.2.12)
7.3.4 Continue to develop and implement neighborhood parking strategies, including
parking districts,to address the lack of on- and off-street parking in residential areas.
Goal 8.1 Special Housing Needs. Encourage the creation and maintenance of housing for
those with special housing needs.
8.2 Policies
8.2.1 Encourage housing development that meets a variety of special needs, including large
families, single parents, disabled persons, the elderly, students, the homeless, or those
seeking congregate care, group housing, single-room occupancy or co-housing
accommodations, utilizing universal design for accessibility, where appropriate.
8.2.2 Preserve manufactured housing parks and support changes in this form of tenure only
if such changes provide residents with greater long-term security or comparable
housing in terms of quality,.cost, and livability.
8.2.3 Encourage manufactured homes in Expansion Areas by:
a) Encouraging developers to create owner-occupied manufactured home parks with
amenities such as greenbelts, recreation facilities, and shopping services within a
master planned community setting. Such parks could be specifically designed to
help address the needs of those with mobility and transportation limitations.
b) Establish lot sizes, setback, and parking guidelines that allow for relatively dense
placement of manufactured homes within the master planned neighborhood.
c) Locate manufactured home parks near public transit facilities or provide public
transportation services to the manufactured home parks to minimize the need for
residents to own automobiles.
8.2.4 Encourage Cal Poly University and Cuesta College to continue to strengthen faculty
and staff housing on State land (such as that along State Highway 1) to pursue on-
campus student housing programs (to lessen pressure on City housing supply and
transportation systems), and to meet both existing and future housing needs,
consistent with the Cal Poly Student Housing Needs Study recommendations.
8.2:5 Strengthen the role of on-campus housing by encouraging Cal Poly University to
require entering freshmen students to live on campus during their first year.
38
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
8.2.6 Fraternities and sororities should be located on the Cal Poly University campus. Until
that is possible, they should be located in Medium-High and High Density residential
zones near the campus.
8.2.7 Special-needs living facilities should be dispersed throughout the City rather than
concentrated in one district.
83 Programs
8.3.1 As funding allows, support local and regional solutions to meeting the needs of the
homeless and continue to support, jointly with other agencies, shelters for the
homeless and for displaced women and children.
8.3.2 Continue the mobile home rent stabilization program to minimize increases in the
cost of mobile home park rents.
8.3.3 Identify sites in specified expansion areas suitable for tenant-owned mobile-home
parks, cooperative housing, manufactured housing, self-help housing, or other types
of housing that meet special needs.
8.3.4 Advocate developing non-dormitory housing on the Cal Poly University campus and
refurbishing existing campus housing and its associated programs to make campus
living more attractive and affordable.
8.3.5 Work with Cal Poly University Administration to secure designation of on-campus
fraternity/sorority living groups.
8.3.6 Jointly develop and adopt a student housing plan and "good neighbor program" with
Cal Poly University, Cuesta College and City residents. The program would seek to
improve communication and cooperation between the City and the schools, set Qn-
campus student housing objectives and establish clear, effective standards for student
housing in residential neighborhoods.
8.3.7 Provide public educational information at the City's Community Development
Department public counter on universal design concepts in new construction.
Goal 9.1 Sustainable Housing, Site, and Neighborhood Design. As part of its
overall commitment to quality of life for its citizens, and to maintaining environmental quality,
the City encourages housing that is resource-conserving, healthful, economical to live in,
environmentally benign, and recyclable when demolished.
39
'd V
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
9.2 Policies
9.2.1 Residential developments should promote sustainability in their design, placement,
and use.. Sustainability can be promoted through a variety of housing strategies,
including the following:
a) Maximize use of renewable, recycled-content, and recycled materials, and
minimize use of building materials that require high levels of energy to produce or
that cause significant, adverse environmental impacts.
b)Incorporate renewable energy features into new homes, including passive solar
design, solar hot water, solar power, and natural ventilation and cooling.
c)Minimize thermal island effects through reduction of heat-absorbing pavement and
increased tree shading.
d)Avoid building materials that may contribute to health problems through the
release of gasses or glass fibers into indoor air.
e)Design dwellings for quiet, indoors and out, for both the mental and physical
health of residents..
f) Design dwellings economical to live in because of reduced utility bills, low cost
maintenance and operation, and improved occupant health.
g)Use construction materials and methods that maximize the recyclability of a
building's parts.
h) Educate public, staff, and builders to the advantages and approaches to sustainable
design, and thereby develop consumer demand for sustainable housing.
i) City will consider adopting a sustainable development rating system, such as the
LEED program.
9.2.2 Residential site, subdivision, and neighborhood designs should be coordinated to
make residential sustainability work. Some ways to do this include:
a) Design subdivisions to maximize solar access for each dwelling.
b) Design sites so residents have usable outdoor space with access to both sun and
shade.
c) Streets and access ways should minimize pavement devoted to vehicular use.
40
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element, March 16,2004
d) Use neighborhood retention basins to purify street runoff prior to its entering
creeks. Retention&eek basins should be designed to be attractive,visual and
functional amenities in the dry season. may,Fenced-off retention basins
should be avoided.
e) Encourage cluster development with dwellings grouped around significantly-
sized, shared open space in return for City approval of smaller individual lots.
f) Treat public streets as landscaped corridors,using continuous parkway planters at
least six feet wide and where feasible, median planters to enhance, define, and to
buffer residential neighborhoods of all densities from the effects of vehicle traffic.
9.2.3 Preserve the physical neighborhood qualities in the Downtown Planning Area Eefe
that contribute to sustainability. Some ways to do this include:
a)Maintain the overall scale, density and architectural character of older
neighborhoods surrounding the Downtown Core, the-eb p-e_eFA fig el ese is :A
b) Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of historically designated housing
stock.
9.2.4 To promote energy conservation and a cleaner environment, encourage the
development of dwellings with energy-efficient designs, utilizing passive and active
solar features, and the use of energy-saving techniques that exceed minimums
prescribed by State law.
9.2.5 Actively promote water conservation though housing and site design to help moderate
the cost of housing.
9.3 Programs
9.3.1 Educate planning and building staff and citizen review bodies on energy conservation
issues, including the City's energy conservation policies and instruct that they work
with applicants to achieve the housing goals that conserve energy.
9.3.2 Revise the Energy Conservation Element to address residential energy conservation
for both new and existing dwellings. Disseminate this information to the public.
9.3.3 Evaluate present solar siting and access regulations to determine if they provide
assurance of long-term solar access for new or remodeled housing and for adjacent
41
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
properties, and revise regulations found to be inadequate.
9.3.4 Consider adopting street and access way standards that reduce the amount of paving
impeFmeablesH £aee devoted to vehicular use.
Goal 10.1 Local Preference. Maximize affordable housing opportunities for those who live
or work in San Luis Obispo while seeking to balance job growth and housing supply.
10.2 Policies
10.2.1 Administer City housing programs and benefits, such as First Time Homebuyer
assistance or affordable housing lotteries, to give preference to: 1) persons living or
working in the City or within the City's Urban Reserve, and 2) persons living in San
Luis Obispo County.
10.2.2 Cal Poly State University and Cuesta College should actively work with the City and
community organizations to create positive environments around the Cal Poly
Campus by:
a) Establishing standards for appropriate student densities in neighborhoods near
Campus;
b) Promoting homeownership for academic faculty and staff in Low-Density
Residential neighborhoods near Campus; and
c) Encouraging and participating in the revitalization of degraded neighborhoods.
10.3 Programs
10.3.1 Work with the County of San Luis Obispo to mitigate housing impacts on the City
due to significant expansion of employment in the unincorporated areas adjacent to
the City. Such mitigation might include, for example, County participation and
support for Inclusionary Housing Programs.
10.3.2 Encourage residential developers to promote their projects within the San Luis
Obispo housing market area(San Luis Obispo County) first.
10.3.3 Advocate the establishment of a link between enrollment gFewth and the expansion of
campus housing programs at Cal Poly University and Cuesta College to reduce
pressure on the City's housing supply.
. AY6fa1B thM fiffther- e*pa}Si9 te-H3Scrcacxmzr"•• ciiS
heasing fer-new employees.
42
r�
f �
Attachment 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,March 16,2004
10.3.4 Work with other jurisdictions to advocate for State legislation that would: 1) provide
fundingto o help Cal Poly University and Cuesta College provide adequate on-campus
student housing, and 2) allow greater flexibility for State universities and community
colleges to enter into public-private partnerships to construct student housing_
Goal 11.1 Suitability. Develop and retain housing on sites that are suitable for that purpose.
11.2 Policies
11.2.1 Where property is equally suited for commercial or residential uses, give preference
to residential use. Changes in land use designation from residential to non-residential
should m44 be discouraged.
11.2.2 Prevent new housing development on sites that should be preserved as dedicated
open space or parks, on sites subject to natural hazards such as unmitigatable
geological or flood risks, or wild fire dangers, and on sites subject to unacceptable
levels of man-made hazards or nuisances, including severe soil contamination, airport
noise or hazards, traffic noise or hazards, odors or-incompatible neighboring uses.
11.3 Program
11.3.1 The City will adopt measures ensuring the ability of legal, conforming non-
residential uses to continue where new housing is proposed on adjacent or nearby
sites.
3.40 Implementation Tools
A variety of Federal, State and local programs and resources are available to help implement the
City's housing goals and activities. These include both financial resources, as well as in-kind
incentives that help address housing needs. Table 3 lists the available resources, incentives and
other tools that can help address housing needs.
Table 3
Resources/Incentives Available For Housin Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Local Resources
City of San Luis Obispo Affordable In-lieu fees paid by developers to Any expense in support of
Housing Fund meet inclusionary housing affordable housing development,
requirements. subject to City Council approval and
adopted criteria(Res.No.9263,
2001 Series).
43 (_ i
W r 1
Attachment 2
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element,January 27,2004
./ Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program.
Fraternity House (or Sorority House). A Residence for college or university students who are
members of a social or educational association, and where such as association holds meetings or
gatherings.
Granny Flat. See"Second Residential Unit."
High Occupancy Residential Use. Any dwelling other than a Residential Care Facility as
defined in the Zoning Regulations, that is located in the R-1 or R-2 zones and is occupied by six
or more adults.
Historic Property. A property, including land and building, determined by the City to have
archaeological, historical, or architectural significance as described in the Historic Preservation
Program Guidelines, and listed on the Contributing Properties List or Master List of Historic
Resources.
Household. All persons, including those related by birth, marriage or adoption and unrelated
persons, who occupy a single dwelling.
Housing or "Dwelling" Unit. A building, a modular home, a mobile home, a cooperative, or
any other residential use considered real property under State law and on a permanent foundation,
with provisions for sleeping,cooking and sanitation, and with permanent connections to utilities.
—� Infill Housing. Development of housing on vacant or underutilized lots within the City limits on
property zoned for such uses.
Jobs-Housing Balance. A ratio describing the number of jobs compared with dwelling units in
a defined geographic area, and a measure of the adequacy of the housing stock to meet
community needs.
Live-Work or Work-Live Unit. An integrated housing unit and work space, occupied and
utilized by a single household in a structure, either single-family or multi-family, that has been
designed or structurally modified to accommodate joint residential occupancy and work
activities, and which includes:
1) Complete kitchen and sanitary facilities in compliance with City building code, and
2) Working space reserved for and regularly used by one or more occupants of the unit.
The difference between "live-work" and "work-live" units.is that the work component of a live-
work unit is secondary to its residential use, and may include only commercial activities and
pursuits compatible with the character of a quiet residential environment, while the work
component of a work-live unit is the primary use, to which the residential component is
194
f�
'fli:.
Attachment 2
San Luis Obispo City Council Draft Housing Element, March 16,2004
such as historic significance, creekside location, or visual prominence, requiring more detailed
development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots nearby.
Single-family Dwelling, Detached. A dwelling occupied or intended for occupancy by only one
household, and that is structurally and physically separate from any other such dwelling.
Single Room Occupancy(SRO) Unit. A single-room dwelling, typically 80-250 square feet in
floor area, with a sink and a closet, with communal facilities for cooking and sanitation.
Tenure. The mode or status of residency,whether by renting or owning real property.
Transitional Housing. Housing provided to homeless persons, abused women or children, or
other persons with special housing needs for a temporary period, and generally integrated with
other social services and programs including counseling, education, and training to assist in the
transition to self-sufficiency through gaining stable income and permanent housing.
Underutilized. Sites or buildings that may be further developed under the City of San Luis
Obispo's Zoning Regulations and that are served by streets and public utilities.
jh4Aousingelemen Wpdate/2004housingelementCCdraft3-16.04
197
LO
CYDNEY HOLCOMB 60S SS4 0365 03/16/04 0S:S2pm P. 001
r
AAA
5- RQ1N
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
P.O. Box 12604 . San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
RECEIVED
RED FILE MAR 1. 6 2004
M ING AGENDA SLO CITY CLERK
DAT W 0ITEM #,TR �
DATE: March 16, 2004 FAXED TO: 781-7109
TO: San Luis Obispo City Council et9iw 0
fZ'COUNCIL ZCDD DIR
RE: Meeting Date: March 16, 2004 X'CA0 Z FIN DIR
Item * PH-6 CAO Z�:FIRE CHIEF
Draft Housing Element UpdateJed' TTORNEY Te PW DIR
ZCLERK/®RIQ Z'PCLICE CHF
I DEPT HEAB9 ;2 REC DIR
UTIL DIR
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council, HR DIR
1. RQN is opposed to the proposal to indude munden&lized`/ofs in bhe Genera/Plan definition
Of"Infill.
This proposal is contrary to your Housing Element Update goal to preserve the character of the
City's existing neighborhoods, especially those in the R-1, low density residential zone.
Underutilized sites generally refer to parcels that are developed with residential structures that
were built at a significantly lower density than permitted under current zoning. For example,
parcels zoned for multi-family development, but which have single-family units or small
apartments on them. The definition of"underutilized lotso, as defined in your agenda report at
Page 6-3, connotes that any lot, large or small, in any zone, (including R-1) which is served by
streets and utilities could be subject to further development or redevelopment.
Staff argues that having a definition of-Infill that includes both vacant and underutilized in-city
parcels is more "similar" to the definition of infill used by HIM. A definition, which they have
not provided and we have been unable to find.
However, we did find a definition of "Infill' that is very similar to one currently used by the
City. The California General Plan Glossary published by the California Planning Roundtable*
defines infill as: "Development of vacant land (usually Individual lots or left`-over properties)
within areas that are already largely developed'.
*A prestigious group of 34 members of the. American Planning Association whose roster
Includes: Cathy Creswell, Deputy Director, HCD; Linda L. Dalton, Executive Vice Provost and
Chief Planning Officer at Cal Poly, Co-Chair of the City's Housing Element Update Task Force;
and, Paul Crawford a Principal at Crawford, Multari &Clark.
CYMNEY HOLCOMB 805 S94 0365 03/16/04 0S:S2pm P. 002
March 16, 2004
DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT Page 2
2. RQN is opposed to the indusibn of R-1 zoned properties designated as "underutilized'on
the Map depicting "In-Oty Pmpertles with Additional Development Capacity"[Flgure D-1,
Page 135J-
Staff has continuously assured City residents and the Council that this Housing Element Update
would not increase the density in existing R-1 neighborhoods - that it was "hands off R-1. It
now appears they are saying that their proposed "quantified objectives" are dependent upon
designating specific developed R-1 lots in existing neighborhoods all over the City as"sites that
may be further developed under the City of San Luis Obispo!;Zoning Regulations and that are
served by streets and public utilities':
Staff argues that a broader definition of infill: "helps demonstrate to HCD that the City has the
suii9dent/and resources to theoretically meet our Regional Housing Needs Allocation and thus
achieve certificadon9 HCD requires, and the City performed, an analysis of the City's
residential resources, including the "theoretical" potential development capacity of vacant sites
and underutilized sites. [see: Draft Housing Element, Table D-1, page 134]. HCD does .not
require underutilized sites to be Included in the"definition" of infill development.
Staff goes on to say that: "If the Clty's definition of infill is not expanded to include
underutilized parcels in the City, the Housing Element Update should include explicit references
to underutilized parcels to address the Issue HCD is looking for".
Unfortunately, these "explidt references to undenurtilized parcels" have already appeared on
the map contained in the Draft Housing Element [Figure D-1, Page 135] and the parcel
addresses can be obtained by cross referencing their locations with other city maps.
You are being asked to approve this map as a permanent part of the Housing Element, with
only a disclaimer in a staff report that states the term underutilized is meant for statistical
purposes and not as a development or growth objective. We believe that while the analysis is
theoretical it becomes a reality when it is placed on a map. Many other cities including
Pasadena do not include maps depicting this information and have HCD adopted housing
elements.
Furthermore, many of the R-1 sites identified in Figure D-1 as "underutilized" have intact
neighborhood CC&Rs which prohibit further subdivision, others have histories of city actions
protecting the large lot character, etc. Your council does not have this information. The owners
of homes on these lots and their surrounding neighbors have also not been given notice of the
proposed City designation affecting their homes and neighborhoods, and have thus been
deprived of the opportunity to comment. For example see Attachment A which shows
underutilized parcels in two different R-1 neighborhoods in Zone 1 that each have intact CC&Rs
prohibiting further subdivision.
CYDNEY HOLCOMB SOS SS4 03BS 03/16!04 OS:S2pm P. 003
I
March 16, 2004
DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT Page 3
3. We therafbre request shat you take the fn//owing action:
a. Change the definition of"infill" to the California Planning Roundtable's definition
which states: Development of vacant land (usually individual lots or left-over
properties) within areas that are already largely developed'.
b. Delete underutilized sites" from the map. [Figure D-1, Page 135].
c. Refigure the Quantified Objectives so that the vast majority of underutilized R-1
lots do not need to be counted. This should not be difficult as the number of
underutilized R-1 lots Is a very small part of the State Housing Mandate.
Respectfully submitted,
Cy net Holcomb
Chairperson, RQN
I
I
Attachment A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CYDNEY HOLCOMS SOS SS4 036S 03/16/04 0S:SZpm P. 004
March 16, 2004
DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT ATTACHMENT A
am, film, Glim,"ars4WD aisNo WIN rrfr
1
41110
.�a amino
pp RECEIVED
C ItyMAR 2004
IIIIIIIIIIII III sAn tuis c E K
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 -
/COUNCIL CDD DIR
, rCAO 'IN DIR
March 12, 2004 CACAO -.1 FIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY ✓ZrrW DIR
MEMORANDUM — RED FILE ITEM Z ,7CLERKICRIG 4ZPOLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS ZREC DIR
Zr UTIL DIR
TO: City Council ZSHR DiR
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer
FROM: Michael Draze, Deputy Comm Development Director.!
BY: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner?W
SUBJECT: Draft Housing Element — Revised Inclusionary Housing Requirement
As described in Council's March 16 Agenda report, the Affordable Housing Requirement
(Table 2) has been revised to incorporate Council's edits. It also reflects higher in-lieu fees in
response to the Mundie and Associates analysis of the Affordable Housing Requirements. The
Planning Commission's recommended Table 2A is still included as an incentive for the
production of compact housing that may offer "affordability by design." Notwithstanding
Table 2A, new residential developments would still be responsible to build at least one long-
term affordable dwelling or pay in-lieu fees.
As an alternative to this approach, Council may consider deleting Table 2A and adding a
Program 2.3.11 which reads:
"Consider modifying the Affordable Housing Requirement to provide incentives for the
production of smaller, more compact housing. Such changes should encourage simple or
"starter" housing that offers more variety and/or affordability by design."
If Council opts for this approach, staff would anticipate returning to the Council later this year
with a package of General Plan amendments, including an amendment to the Housing Element
to include such an incentive.
RED FILE
AT
MG AGEND/j_
D � ITEM # �
Jh/L/citycouncil/ccrnemo3-12-04
® The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410.
���11111�III��111�IIIIIIIIIII RECEIVED
IIIIIIII IIIOf5 0
Cl 1�11�11S
K
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
March 12, 2004 COUNCIL TCDD DIn
7&C AO FIN DIR
MEMORANDUM - RED FILE ITEM J�ACAO IRE CHIEF
Z ATTORNEY LPW DIR
O CLERK/ORIG lC POLICE CHF
TO: City Council fd DEPT HEADS }G REC DIR
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer , � - k LITIL DIR
� �HR DTR
FROM: Michael Draze, Deputy Co Development Director =—
BY: Jeff Hook, Associate PI r
SUBJECT: Draft Housing Element - General Plan Consistency Update
The Draft Housing Element includes a General Plan Consistency Analysis in Appendix I.
That analysis has been updated to reflect Council's changes to Chapter 3. As a result of that
update, staff has identified three General Plan inconsistencies that will need to be addressed.
These are described in Table 1 below.
General Plans must be internally consistent. In adopting the Draft Housing Element Update,
Council can address the inconsistency by 1) modifying the Draft Housing Element for
consistency with adopted General Plan policy; or 2) amending the General Plan for consistency
with the Draft Housing Element. Staff recommends the latter approach. The inconsistencies
are all with the Land Use Element, which itself is due for updating in 2004-2006. Council
should, in its resolution approving the Housing Element Update, provide direction to staff to
return with the necessary amendments to achieve consistency at the earliest possible date. The
General Plan may be amended four times a year, and staff tries to "batch" amendments and
space these evenly throughout the calendar year. Staff would anticipate coming back to
Council with the next batch of amendments, later this year. In the meantime, the more
recently adopted General Plan element would prevail.
Table 1. General Plan Inconsistencies (reference: General Plan Digest)
Draft Housing Element Adopted General Plan Policy Significance
Policy or Program or Pro ram in Conflict
Program 3.3.5 - "No Net LU 4.2.2 - Dwellings and Offices. No net loss strategy would
Loss" in Downtown Calls for onsite replacement of allow offsite replacement
housing and creation of R/O zone. of housing units lost.
Program 6.3.3 - Downtown LU 3.1.6 - Building Intensity Flexible residential density
Housing Incentives, flexible incentive could exceed 36
density. I units per acre
Appendix M - Glossary. GP Digest - Glossary. "Infill Broadens definition of infill
"Infill Housing." (includes Housing" (includes vacant land only). housing to help meet
vacant and underutilized land), Quantified Objectives.
Jh/Ucitycounci11ccmemo3-12-04B RED.FILE
ME ING AGENDA
DATEA*ITEM #
OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410.
��iil�lllll�llllllf VIII IIIIIII �DIII����► �
IIIIIIII III
City Of SAn IuIS OBISPOMom
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
March 11, 2004 RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
MEMORANDUM - RED FILE ITEM DATE 5,IVITEM #� (o
TO: City Council I/
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officerd�
FROM: John Mandeville, Community-Development Director"��Tp�
BY: Jeff Hook, Associate Plann
SUBJECT: Neighborhoods North of Foothill Recommended Changes to Draft Housing
Element Policies 8.2.4 - 8.2.8
On March 1 Council completed its review of Chapter 3 of the Draft Housing Element. Staff
has incorporated Council's changes into a "Revised Draft Chapter 3" and Council will review
the revised Chapter 3 on March 16. Council's revised wording is shown in section "A" below.
Staff recently received a letter from Neighborhoods North of Foothill (NNOF) which
recommends changes to draft policies 8.2.4 - 8.2.8. That letter was already distributed to
Council members. NNOF's recommended changes and staffs responses are shown in section
"B." Staff reviewed the recommendations and in general, found them to be consistent with
Council's intent. The changes are primarily "wordsmithing" for clarity and consistent
format. In the case of Draft Policy 8.2.4, NNOF recommends splitting it into two policies to
address Cal Poly University and Cuesta College separately, and to eliminate a reference to Cal
Poly staff and faculty housing "on State land (such as that along Highway 1)".
A. EXCERPT FROM REVISED COUNCIL HEARING DRAFT HOUSING
ELEMENT
(Council's edits from March 1, 2004 hearing)
8.2.4 Encourage Cal Poly University and Cuesta College to continue to strengthen faculty
and staff housing on State land (such as that alone State Highway 1) to pursue on-
campus student housing programs (to lessen pressure on City housing supply and
transportation systems), and to meet both existing and future housing needs,
consistent with the Cal Poly Student Housing Needs Study recommendations.
8.2.5 Strengthen the role of on-campus housing by encouraging Cal Poly University
to require entering freshmen students to live on campus during their first year.
8.2.6 Fraternities and sororities should be located on the Cal Poly University campus. Until
that is possible, they should be located in Medium-High and,-H4,-Den i#3ZresidPn+;al
_. i. :C, CDD D!R
h�ra� E:AO FIN DIR e•A�
❑-ACAO FIRE CHIEF
fga6FO6-�2
TTORNEY PW DIR
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, p qes. ❑ POLICE CHF
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. EPT HE.gDS ❑ AEC DIR
ry' 1 UTIL DIR
i
NNOF Recommended Changes to Draft Housing Element
Page 2
zones near the campus.
8.2.7 Special-needs living facilities should be dispersed throughout the City rather than
concentrated in one district.
8.2.8 Encourage Cal Poly University to provide staff and faculty housing on sites designated as
H-8 and H-9 along Highway 1.
B. NNOF RECOMMENDED WORDING CHANGES FOR COUNCIL
HEARING DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT POLICIES 8.2.4-8.2.8 AND
STAFF'S RESPONSE
8.2.4 Encourage Cal Poly University to continue to develop student housing on campus to
meet both existing and future needs in order to lessen pressure on City housing
supply and transportation systems.
Staff response: Support recommended wording, with minor edits as follows:
8.2.4 Encourage Cal Poly University to continue to develop on-campus student
housing to meet existing and future needs and to lessen pressure on City housing
supply and transportation systems.
8.2.5 Strengthen the role of on-campus housing by encouraging Cal Poly University to
require entering freshmen students to live on campus during their first year.
Staff response: O.K. It is consistent with Council's wording from March 1.
8.2.6 Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. Until that is
possible, they should be located in Medium-High and High Density Residential zones
near the campus.
Staffresponse: O.K. It is consistent with Council's wording from March 1.
8.2.7 Encourage Cal Poly University to develop faculty and staff housing which is consistent
with City General Plan policies.
NNOF Recommended Changes to Draft Housing Element
Page 3
Staff response: This revision differs from Council's revised Policy 8.2.4 by deleting the
reference to faculty and staff housing on "State land (such as that along State Highway 1. "
Instead it refers to consistency with General Plan policies. Development within the City's
Urban Reserve is expected to be consistent with the General Plan, so this change provides little
additional guidance to decision makers. The City's Quantified Objectives assume development of
faculty and staff on sites H-8 and H-9 and staffs suggested wording will not preclude
consideration of faculty and staff housing on other sites. Staff recommends more specific
wording to read as follows:
8.2.8 Encourage Cal Poly University to develop faculty and staff housing on sites
designated as H-8 and H-9, located on State-owned land along Highway 1.
8.2.9 Encourage Cuesta College to explore opportunities and strategies for the development of
student housing on the Cuesta Campus to meet both existing and future needs in order to
lessen pressure on City housing supply and transportation systems.
Staff response: O.K. It is consistent with Council's wording from March 1.
8.2.10 Disperse special needs living facilities throughout the City rather than concentrate them
in one district.
Staff response: O.K. It is consistent with Council's wording from March 1.
Ih/UcitycounciUccmemo3-11-04
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA RECEIVED
DATE,(* ITEM # MAH 16 2004
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce SLO CITY CLERK
1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3278
(805) 781-2777 9 FAX (805) 543-1255 • TDD (805) 541-8416
David E. Garth, President/CEO
March 16, 2004
.- SmaL D
1-:<;0 U NCL �DD DIR
21CAO 2�FIN DIR
,B'ACAO FIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY -ePW DIR
Mayor Dave Romero and Members of the City Council aCLERKIORIG -Lf POLICE CHF
_1-DEPT HEADS ;REC DIR
City of San Luis Obispo :? UTIL DIR
990 Palm St. ? [YH R D In,
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Draft Housing Element, Inclusionary Housing Requirement, Table 2 and 2A
Dear Mayor Romero and Council Members:
Several of the proposed changes to the inclusionary housing requirement create concern
among our members and our Board of Directors agreed at its meeting this morning, to
request you carefully consider the consequences, some of which may be unintended, of
significantly increasing in-lieu fees.
First, on the residential side of the Table 2, for development projects in the city limits,
raising the in-lieu fee from 5% to 10% of building valuation is simply too large an
increase and places a significant burden on the landowner/developer who may not have
a suitable property or lot on which to build the ADU's but who may have a desirable
project based on other criteria. Since increasing affordable housing stock and/or the
funds to provide it is the goal of our inclusionary housing policy, doesn't it seem more
practical to have a fee that is reasonable?
On the commercial side, to go from 2% to 10% of building valuation for the in-lieu fee
will certainly sound the death toll on most commercial development and have the
unintended consequence of producing no affordable housing or monies for housing.
This was the thinking of a City Council appointed task force in the late 90s that studied
the feasibility of raising the fee from 2% to 5%. That group, representing a cross section
of the community, concluded that 5% would stifle development while 2% could be
absorbed by the developer while at the same time put money into the housing program.
This rationale is still true in today's marketplace. As it stands now, fees for commercial
development are significant. A large increase in the in-lieu fee could close the door on
e-mail: slochamber@slochamber:org 9 websites: www.slochamber.org www.visitslo.com
r r
projects like Costco and Court Street that promise to bring significant revenue to the
city. It will also discourage expansion of existing, local businesses such as Stanley
Motors and Kennedy Club Fitness.
In order to have a vibrant community, it is necessary to have economic vitality and an
8% fee increase places that in jeopardy. It could well bring an end to the hoped for
Airport Area Annexation which the city has been working on for many years. As
landowners compare the cost of doing business in the City or developing in the County
this raise to 10% would most certainly tip the scales in the direction of the County. To
look at it another way, existing commercial properties would immediately increase in
value by 10% without adding anything to the local economy, either for housing or for
business interests.
Finally, regarding Table 2A, the idea of an adjustment factor is one that warrants
additional review but is not ready for adoption at this time. We would ask that you
allow an opportunity for sufficient study of the most effective way to implement this
concept.
Thank you for considering our opinion on these points and for the many hours of effort
that you have given to reviewing and refining the Housing Element.
Sincerely,
aura Murphy
Chairperson of the Board
cc: Ken Hampian, CAO
John Mandeville, Community Development Director
Mike Draze, Deputy Director of Community Development
Shelly Stanwyck, Economic Development Manager
RED FILE
MV
COUNCIL FING AGENDA
- coo DIR TEM #
� JZ(CAO �=,N ORDATE'77Bf�.t--
ACAO =IRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY - P DIR Neighborhoods North of Foothill NNOF
.�CLERK'ORI c .y'POUCE CHF A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation
PT HEAD .0 RTC DIR P.O.Bog 13023,San Luis Obispo CA 9340
eHR DIR 80 542-9554 RECEIVED
MAH 0 9 2004
March 8, 2004 $LO CITY CLERK
To: Honorable Mayor Dave Romero and Members of the City Council
From: Ira Alpert,President,Neighborhoods North of Foothill
Regarding: Draft Housing Element Policy 8.2.4-8.2.9
The City Council action Monday, March 1, 2004 on the Draft Housing Element
Policy 8.2.4 is a cause of concern to Neighborhoods North of Foothill as it is presently
worded. After the meeting we spoke to Jeff Hook about our concern and he sub-
sequently suggested an alternative wording of the policy. We find his proposed version
also unacceptable.
We offer for your consideration substitute wording of Policy 8.2.4. (see Attachment.)
This does require renumbering the policies that follow it. .Our rationale for this wording
is as follows:
1. 8.2.4 as amended lumps together student housing at Cuesta and Cal Poly as well as
faculty/staff housing for Cal Poly. The three are disparate elements and should be
treated separately since each has different needs and actions.
A. Cal Poly has on-campus housing for 3500 students at present and has committed
to building more. However the plans for the Student Housing North project have
been suspended and to date there has been no alternative announced. With the
prospect of a cut back in enrollment because of the State's financial crisis, the
University may argue that the need for campus housing has diminished.
However,even should enrollment be cut back to 17,000 students for September
2004,there would still be 13;500 students needing housing in the community.
B. Cuesta has no campus housing to strengthen. Cuesta needs to begin a program
from scratch. They need to identify the land, water and financing sources to make
it happen.
C. Faculty and staff housing for Cal Poly is still in the planning stages, thus not yet
ready for strengthening. Since the University refuses to place these projects on
the core campus, they will impact local neighborhoods. Inasmuch as the
University will act at its pleasure, Cal Poly should be encouraged to make sure
that their projects are consistent with City General Plan policies.
2. There is no need to mention"state land"or"state-owned property such as along
Highway L" What needs to be stated is the sincere request that whatever the
University does is consistent with the City's General Plan.
3. The Cal Poly Housing Needs Study is at least five years old, does not apply to either
Cuesta or Cal Poly faculty-staff housing and is best left out of the City's policy
statement.
We believe our proposed wording more accurately reflects conditions and can better
guide decision making than that devised by the Council on March 1' or that proposed
by Mr. Hook. By beginning 8.2.8 and 8.2.9 with verbs it makes them consistent with the
preceeding policies. We urge you to give our recommendations your careful
consideration.
Joan Lynch(at 542-9554)or I (at 547-7025x100) would be happy to discuss these
subjects with you.
Sincerely yours,
ZG
Ira Alpert, President
Neighborhoods North of Foothill
Attachment of March 8, 2004
Proposed Changes to Housing Element Policy 8.2.4 et seq.
I 1 �
ATTACHMENT March 8, 2004
PROPOSED WORDING CHANGES TO 8.2.4 et seq.
8.2.4 Encourage Cal Poly University to continue to develop student housing on campus
to meet both existing and future needs in order to lessen pressure on City housing
supply and transportation systems.
8.2.5 Strengthen the role of on-campus housing by encouraging Cal Poly University to
require entering freshmen students to live on campus during their first year.
8.2.6 Locate fraternities and sororities on the Cal Poly University campus. Until that is
possible, they should be located in Medium-High and High-Density residential
zones near the campus.
8.2.7 Encourage Cal Poly University to develop faculty and staff housing which is
consistent with City General Plan policies.
8.2.8 Encourage Cuesta College to explore opportunities and strategies for the
development of student housing on the Cuesta campus to meet both existing and
future needs in order to lessen pressure on City housing supply and transportation
systems.
8.2.9 Disperse special-needs living facilities throughout the City rather than concentrate
them in one district.
RECEIVED
RED FILE MAR 0 o 2004
MEETING AGENDA • •
abitat for Humanity SLO CITY CLERK
DATO ITEM #�.�U H
for San Luis Obispo County
Post Office Box 613
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
2146 Parker Street #A2
805-782-0687 hfhslocoC&kcbx.net, www.kcbx.net/—hfhsloco 1 'n
March 2, 2004 i
COUNCIL ADD DIR
f, CAO SIN DIR
Dave Romero �ACAO SIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY y'7,IPW DIR
Mayor CLERK/ORIG OUCE CHF
City Hall ❑ DEPT HEADS 2RREC DIR
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 L ;:;,UTIL DIR
_ HR DIR
Dear Mayor Romero,
I am writing to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of Habitat for Humanity for San
Luis Obispo County. We encourage you to support the updated City Housing Element
now under consideration. We believe that, while the Element might benefit from some
minor additional"tweaking", its basic policies and programs are sound and merit your
endorsement.
Habitat for Humanity is a non-profit, volunteer-based organization that builds homes for
and with very low-income families. That is households making between 25%and 5001c of
the median income for the county. The families contribute"sweat equity" and hold no-
interest mortgages from Habitat to become homeowners.
Very low and low-income families have great difficulty finding decent housing in our
county. Habitat for Humanity, like other non-profit builders and housing providers,
recognizes that only with support from our community as a whole—goverment, business,
and residents—can we hope to make a dent in the need so that the very low and low-
income workers who provide so many important services to all of us can afford to live
among the people they serve.
Habitat is pleased that the updated Housing Element provides incentives to build smaller,
compact dwellings; that it favors mixed-use development and changes in zoning to allow
denser development and infill; and that it commits the City to actively seek Federal and
State grants, loans, etc. to provide affordable housing. We applaud the increase in in-lieu
fees for inclusionary housing, but our major concern is an inclusionary policy that works—
that really gets the housing for low and very low-income households built. We can't tell
you exactly what that policy should be, but higher in-lieu fees for large dwellings might be
one way to both increase the housing fund and encourage builders to build smaller, more
affordable units. We commend the City for supporting the countywide Housing Trust
RECEIVED
Dnp 0 9 2 04
s�O CITY COUNCIL
Fund. All of these policies and programs, if implemented, can help relieve the housing
burden for very low and low-income households by creating more housing they can afford.
Habitat for Humanity is also pleased to see support for the intermixture of housing
affordable to various economic groups and the requirement to include land zoned for
affordable housing in Specific Plans for the Expansion Areas. Integrating affordable
housing within neighborhoods of market-rate housing is vital if we hope to avoid
stigmatizing neighborhoods and the residents who live there. Economic segregation can
only weaken our community as a whole.
While we were disappointed that some of the fees waived for very low and low-income
housing in the Housing Element draft were reinstated in the final document, we recognize
that the City's financial problems make it difficult to forego these fees. We wish the City
well in its efforts to seek new funding sources to help defray City development review and
impact fees for developers of affordable housing.
We believe that this update is a step in the right direction. Building smaller, compact
housing near jobs and services and in economically mixed neighborhoods is important to
building strong communities that include all members of our society. Habitat for
Humanity will be watching to see that the policies and programs in the Housing Element
are implemented so that we can start to do this.
Sincerely,
1�v Q444�-,
Mary Von Achen
President
J-�Va it^
RECEIVED • d00%b e -
MAR 15 2004 Children's
SLO CITY CLERK Services Network T
CIIYQr rc;.: I ,: (
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY r' ''� V.Ji�t'U
Www.co.slo.ca.us/csn
March 3, 2004 MAR I 0 2004
John Mandeville,.Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Community Development Department
LELAND W.COLLINS,chair City of San Luis Obispo
Department of Social Services
P.0.Box 8119 P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo CA 93403-8119 -Luis Obispo, CA 93403 RED FILE ;
ME ING AGENDA
NETWORK COUNCIEMEMBERS Dear Mr. Mandeville:
DATE ifs ITEM # 0
Asset Development Network
Board of Supervisors(Ex-officio) At our January 22, 2004 meeting, the Economic Self-Sufficiency
Board of Supervisors Appointees
California Polytechnic State university Partnership (ESP) passed unanimously a motion to commend
Childcare Planning Council
City Administrators City of San Luis Obispo for the excellent planning work exhibited
,
Communications Committee Chair by the draft-General Plan Housing Element, with particular
Community Partnership Committee Chair emphasis on affordable housing. The problems of finding housing
County Administrative Officer(Ex officio)
County Counsel(Ex officio) are particularly frustrating for the low-income clients seen by our
County Superintendent s
Court Appointed SpecialAdvocates(CASA)l -social and human services agencies. Weare encouraged that
Voices for Children the City both recognizes the Housing crisis and sets forth a
Criminal Justice Administrators'Association comprehensive solution.
Cuesta Community College
Department of Social Services
District Attorney Our group is comprised of representatives from social service
.Drug and Alcohol Services(Behavioral Health Services)
Economic Opportunity Commission(EOC) agencies, human services programs, employment/training
Economic Self-Sufficiency Partnership Chair resources and other programs (housing, transportation) that
Education and Training Committee Chair
El Paso de Robles School(CYA) coordinate to move our clients toward self-reliant lives. The
Family Care Network,Inc. combination of programs found in the draft plan will work together
Poster Parent Association to increase affordable housing as a "toolbox" of mechanisms to
Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo g .
Integrated Services Committee Chair encourage development to meet the needs of all of'your
Juvenile Justice Commission
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council Chair
residents. We hope you retain.all 'programs inclusionary housing
Latino Outreach Council requirement, secondary residential units, city housing fund,
League of Women Voters
Literacy Council impact fee modification and the others that will assist in housing
Mental Health Services(Behavioral Health services)- persons with special needs and very low income.
Ministerial Association(s) -
Needs Assessment Committee Chair
Private Industry Council In addition, please.consider participating in the San Luis-Obispo
Public He DepartmelthDepart County Housing Trust Fund, a project:which will establish an
Public Health DeparMent
Public Policy Committee Chair ongoing source of funds for affordable housing within the city and
Restorative Justice Steering Committee Chair county.
San Luis Obispo Child Abuse Prevention Council
(SLO-CAP)
School District Superintendents . And our compliments again on constructing a vital and
Sheriff's Department much-needed response to the affordable housing crisis.
Special Education Local Planning Area(SELPA) p g
Superior Court(Juvenile Court Judge/Commissioner)
Transitions/Mental Hearth Association. Sincerely,
Tri-Counties Regional Center r
United Way 3"COUNCIL -CCDD DIR
f XCAO FIN DIR
Julia Miller,Network Coordinator ,�ACAQ $FIRE CHIEF
jmiller@co.slo.ca.us J et Amanzio, Committee Chair ATTORNEY _ PW DIR '
ep--P1 CLERK/ORIG .ice POUCE CHF
D.�j T EADS. fRECDIR
P.O. Box 8119 _ i'rJ7v�— m ZHR DIR fa UTIL DIR
.__
- - San Luis Obispo,California 93403-8119 ��_
805/781-1847 Fax 805/788-2560