My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
4A Public Hearing 2014 1006
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2014
>
Packet 2014 1006
>
4A Public Hearing 2014 1006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2014 10:59:18 AM
Creation date
10/1/2014 10:15:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
10/6/2014
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2014 1006 CS+RG
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2014\Packet 2014 1006
MO 2014-020
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Minute Orders\2014
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
266
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
WORKING DRAFT FOR HCD REVIEW <br /> <br /> <br />EVALUATION OF 2010 ELEMENT 2-40 SAN LEANDRO HOUSING ELEMENT <br />Action Summary Progress <br />59.01- <br />E <br />(a) Consider adding a definition of “Supportive <br />Housing” to the Zoning Code, and amending the <br />lists of permitted and conditionally permitted uses <br />to indicate where this use is allowed; (b) Make <br />residential hotels a conditionally permitted use in <br />at least one of the DA zones. They are currently <br />only a conditionally permitted use in the SA-1 <br />zone. <br />REVISE/REPLACE. (a) A definition of supportive <br />housing has not been added, although the Zoning Code <br />was amended in 2011 to be compliant with SB2 (the <br />amendment ensures that supportive housing is not subject <br />to standards beyond those applying to other housing units <br />of the same type in the same zone). (b) The trend in most <br />communities is to treat SROs as a multi-family use rather <br />than to call them out as a separate land use. Thus, given <br />the state-mandated language on supportive housing, this <br />action may no longer be necessary. <br />59.01- <br />F <br />Monitor the impacts of minimum density <br />standards on development activity in the <br />Downtown TOD area to ensure they are <br />reasonable and reflective of market conditions. <br />While no changes to these standards are proposed <br />at this time, they should be periodically evaluated <br />and compared to standards around other transit <br />stations in the Bay Area. <br />ADVANCE. This continues to be an appropriate action. <br />Development activity in the TOD area was stalled by the <br />poor economy during most of the 2007-14 planning <br />period. As activity picks up, the City will continue to <br />consult with property owners and the development <br />community to ensure that the adopted standards are <br />appropriate. <br />59.01- <br />G <br />Consider adjustments to zoning, design review, <br />permitting, and site plan review requirements to <br />ensure that above moderate income households <br />are not unduly burdened by planning and <br />building requirements and to encourage <br />continued high levels of private investment in <br />San Leandro’s housing stock and residential <br />neighborhoods. <br />REPLACE. Based on public feedback during the 2015- <br />2023 Update, and the findings of the Constraints <br />Analysis, this should be replaced with a program to <br />periodically convene “roundtables” and other forums for <br />those in the development, finance, and real estate <br />industries to discuss the factors that influence <br />development activity and real estate decisions in the city. <br />59.02- <br />A <br />Consider amending the parking standards as <br />follows: (a) Make the parking standards in the <br />NA districts comparable to those in the SA <br />districts, reflecting the lower level of demand on <br />high-volume transit corridors; (b) Allow a greater <br />percentage of the parking spaces in multi-family <br />housing near transit stations or along transit <br />corridors to be uncovered; (c) Eliminate guest <br />parking requirements for buildings with less than <br />4 units; (d) Lower the parking requirements for <br />studio apartments from 1.5 to 1.25 spaces/ unit. <br />REVISE. This should be done as part of a <br />comprehensive set of zoning revisions following adoption <br />of the new General Plan in 2016. Specifically: (a) this <br />may no longer be necessary given the elimination of the <br />NA-1 zone and the relatively low development potential <br />in NA-2; (b) this should be advanced for further <br />discussion; (c) this should be advanced for further <br />discussion; (d) this should be advanced for further <br />discussion. <br />59.03- <br />A <br />Maximize the potential benefits of the City’s <br />permit tracking system, one stop permitting <br />center, and website to facilitate permit <br />processing. <br />ADVANCE. This action is implemented on an ongoing <br />basis and should be carried forward. The City continues <br />to expand its GIS capacity and the use of its website for <br />permit applications, processing, and tracking. The City <br />uses its permit tracking data base to issue regular reports, <br />enabling staff to monitor construction activity, issues, and <br />trends in the city. In 2014, the City began the process of <br />replacing and modernizing its permit tracking system <br />from Tidemark to Accela. <br />59.04- <br />A <br />Regularly review and update development and <br />permitting fees. <br />ADVANCE. This remains an important action and is <br />implemented on an annual basis. Effective July 1, 2014, <br />the City enhanced its long range planning capacity with a <br />new Community Planning Fee. It also streamlined and <br />updated other planning and building fees and costs. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.