The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLopes - PC Budget Goals - 12-03-181 From:James Lopes < Sent:Friday, November 30, 2018 4:47 PM To:Fowler, Xzandrea Cc:E-mail Council Website; Advisory Bodies; Nick Wilson; Peter Johnson Subject:Re: Planning Commission Budget Goals? Attachments:19-21 Advisory Bodies Goal - Planning Commission.pdf Hi Xzandrea, Thank you for your quick response to my inquiry about the Planning Commission recommendations on the Budget ‐ I wish I was as fast. I think the Jan. 23 Forum was postponed at the Council meeting to a date in February. I am copying this to both the Planning Commission and the City Council, due to the substantial problem that recommendation #2 on housing presents. I hope that this memo will lead to substantive clarification to all concerned. First though, I think that the Planning Commission recommendation #1 is actually recommending two activities which are supported by Save Our Downtown: A start on implementation of Downtown Concept Plan programs, and second, the start on updating Mission Plaza according to its plan. The text in the attachment seems to focus only on Mission Plaza. At any rate, everyone seems to want both plans to move forward. Looking at the Planning Commission (PC) recommendation #2, did you clarify to the Commissioners what "workforce" housing is? Were they aware that this refers to an income range higher than "moderate (80 to 120% of median/average income?" It is not a term yet in City housing standards, and it would not be eligible for the City programs for inclusionary units or funding. The 2015 Housing element has this policy to which I am referring: "2.16 The City will evaluate and consider including a workforce level of affordability in its Affordable Housing Standards to increase housing options in the City for those making between 121 percent and 160 percent of the San Luis Obispo County median income. This affordability category cannot be used to meet inclusionary housing ordinance requirements and is not eligible for City Affordable Housing Funds." In other words, the PC appears to be recommending that our most pressing housing shortage is in middle‐class and maybe even upper‐middle class housing. I just read of a regional business promotion organization forming, Hourglass, and its leaders emphasize that they are looking for firms with high and very high paying jobs, to replace exiting PG&E workers and I presume to boost high‐end shopping sales and home buys. Is this the income range which the Planning Commissioners suggest needs housing assistance? It doesn't make sense that the Commission wants to increase the production of above‐moderate priced housing, since this is what is commonly being built in the first phases of all the large projects. It is the first kind of housing builders like since it is high‐profit, but it is the last kind of housing that we need. Would you look into this recommendation and how staff will characterize it in the multiple contexts which I've just described? Someone needs to be more precise perhaps when discussing housing and incomes when using this term, "workforce." Certainly the City cannot be serious that everyone understands it and this is the level of income to support! It is way above what the City needs to provide in housing, and decision makers need to know that the terms they use make a big difference. Thank you, James Lopes 2 On 11/27/2018 12:48 PM, Fowler, Xzandrea wrote: Hi James, Attached are the final goals that the Planning Commission forwarded to the City Council for consideration. According to the Council staff reported dated 11/13/18, the next steps in the schedule for the Finacial Plan budget process should be as follows: December 4th - Council reviews budget policies, the Capital Improvement Plan, and economic trends for the upcoming five-year period January 23rd - Community Forum for goal setting February 5th - Council reviews the General and Enterprise Funds' five-ear fiscal forecast February 7th - Council Goal setting workshop June 4th - Council reviews the 2019-21 Financial Plan Here is the link to the referenced staff report: http://opengov.slocity.org/weblink/1/doc/86770/Page1.aspx Xzandrea Fowler Deputy Director Community Development Community Development Long Range Planning 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 E XFowler@slocity.org T 805.781.7274 slocity.org -----Original Message----- From: James Lopes <jameslopes@charter.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 12:12 PM To: Fowler, Xzandrea <XFowler@slocity.org> Subject: Planning Commission Budget Goals? Hi Xzandrea, What 2019-21 Budget goals did the Planning Commission approve? The action update for October 25 just says they approved some, and the Minutes end at 9- 26-18. I'm thinking that they were aligned pretty well with the suggestions of Save Our Downtown. Can you also refer me to the latest published schedule for the Budget hearings? Thanks, James Lopes -- James Lopes 3 Ph. 805-602-1365 2019‐21 Financial Plan Proposed Major City Goals Planning Commission Background The Planning Commission prioritized the following goals based on evaluation on the completion status for the 2017‐19 Major City Goals and General Plan goals; community need, and input received over the past 2 years; special and urgent conditions that need to be addressed; and the availability of City resources to accomplish the identified goals and work programs within the financial plan timeframe. Goals 1. Land Use: Implementation of the Downtown Concept Plan and Revisit Special Focus Areas Implement the Mission Plaza improvements as identified in the Downtown Concept Plan. Revisit the Special Focus Area development guidelines for the Foothill Boulevard/ Santa Rosa Area and Upper Monterey to establish detailed design guidelines that enhance neighborhood integrity and the diverse community character. 2. Housing: Increase Affordable and Workforce Housing Supply Emphasize affordable housing programs, encourage flexible use and non‐traditional housing product types to facilitate development of workforce housing. Review existing regulations to identify cost and time saving measures to promote the development of accessory dwelling units, while maintaining the owner occupancy requirement to protect neighborhood compatibility and wellness. 3. Sustainability: Reduce GHG Emissions by Reducing VMT and Improving Residential Energy Efficiency of Pre‐1990 Housing Stock Update and implement the Climate Action Plan with emphasis on: 1) encouraging project design that promotes accessible, convenient and safe pedestrian, bicycle and transit access that reduces project generated vehicle miles traveled by 20‐40% below average; 2) developing standards that support infrastructure improvements for alternative transportation and electric vehicles; and 3) identify and implement financial incentives for improving energy efficiency in pre‐ 1990 housing stock. 4. Multi‐Modal Circulation: Improve Walkability and Transit Implement the Multi‐Modal objectives identified in the LUCE and the Downtown Concept Plan by encouraging in‐fill development to include non‐automobile alternatives. Conduct a walkable community survey in major neighborhoods to inform the development of the Active Transportation Plan, and to identify improvements that would encourage and support pedestrian activities for people with varying degrees of mobility. Implement the Short‐Range Transit Plan to improve transit ridership by exploring operational improvements that could reduce run times to less than 20 minutes along routes that serve densely populated areas.