HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-10-2017 - SmithCOUNCIL MEETING: RECEIVED
ITEM NO.: ob},� Co,,,r,, E„
JAN 10 2017
SI..O CITY CLERK
From: Scott Smith [
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 9:32 AM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Cc: Lichtig, Katie <klicht1g@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>
Subject: Jan 10 2017 Council Meeting - City Goals/Priorities
Dear Council members,
HASLO (the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo) urges you to adopt affordable housing as a
top priority for the City. HASLO provides affordable housing to about 7,000 persons every
month (about 3,000 households), and half of those are within the City of San Luis Obispo. We
do this through housing that we own and operate (directly or through partnerships), and the
Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8) which provides rental subsidies to private
landlords on behalf of very low-income households. Many of those that we serve that do not
reside in San Luis Obispo, wish to reside here due to jobs, services and family
ties. Unfortunately, they cannot due to housing scarcity.
The council has shown creativity and initiative in adopting policies that strongly support
affordable housing. We encourage you to continue pursuing affordable housing as a major
City goal. Some areas that will assist the City achieve this goal include, but are not limited to
the following:
1. Maintain a strong Inclusionary Zoning Policy for both residential and commercial
development. Our land, water, sewer and other resources are limited, and as a result
we need to ensure community wide benefit as they are utilized.
2. Ensure a strong, meaningful "in -lieu" option if a developer opts not to build the
housing under the Inclusionary. This means making sure that the "in lieu" options are
mathematically calculated in a manner that financially allows the housing to be
produced by a non-profit or other developer utilizing the in -lieu equivalency (land or
cash) contributed by the original developer. This equivalency is important to the
integrity of the program. The in -lieu options should be reviewed regularly to ensure
they are achieving the intent.
3. Encourage housing within commercial projects, i.e. mixed use.
4. Continue to reduce parking requirements for affordable housing, so that our entire land
inventory is not built out with places for "cars to live" rather than people. We urge you
to improve the public transportation system, as an offset to parking reductions. Our
current system is extremely lacking and incentivizes "hopping in the car".
5. Continue to allow buildings to go "taller" and at higher densities, in order to preserve
the compact form of our city, and maintain a quality green belt and the open spaces
that we enjoy.
6. Include affordable housing as a eligible use in any future "infrastructure tax measure"
such as Measure G. Affordable housing and homelessness were rated as top issues
along with infrastructure in the original community needs survey that preceded
Measure Y. Yet housing and homelessness were not included as eligible uses in the
crafting of Measure Y or its successor Measure G.
7. Be wary of the term "Workforce Housing". It is a highly relevant, appropriate term, but
gets thrown around very loosely. Workforce Housing is defined in City and County
documents as households earning 160% of the Area Median Income. For a family of
four, that is an income of $122,240 (2016 data to be updated spring 2017). That is not
what the common person thinks we need or what we are getting when someone
promises to produce workforce housing. Most people believe, and the data supports
this, that we need "workforce" housing for persons earning $35,000 - $75,000
annually. That is essentially persons earning 60-120% of Area Median Income, or "Low
and Moderate Income". We have plenty of housing for persons at 160% of median.
If you "give away the store" with policy incentives to encourage Workforce housing
defined as 160% of median income, you may not get the community benefit that you
anticipated. For example, the Homebuilders Association recently convinced the County
to allow "Workforce Housing at 160% of median income" as an In Lieu option under its
Inclusionary ordinance, eliminating the requirement to target households at 80-120% of
median. The HBA is further attempting to weaken the County's Inclusionary ordinance
by lobbying to set the In -Lieu fee payment option at a "pennies on the dollar" level
despite record building permit applications. This is very concerning and should not be
the City's path.
Thank you for your dedication to our community, including your efforts to make it an inclusive
City for all.
Sincerely,
Scott Smith
Executive Director
HASLO
Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo, CA
(
Visit our website at www. haslo. org
z
o4t�Hou$1liy Ay%A7J LUA ON:SQQ