►
From YouTube: Planning Commission - Wednesday Dec 16, 2020 5:30pm
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
Okay,
roll
call
so
starting
with
the
plan
commission
commissioner
brown
here,
commissioner
crandall
here,
commissioner
kaczynski
here,
chairpro
tem
wu
here
vice
chair
blackwell,.
B
Chair
roland
here
and
now,
moving
on
to
the
city
council,
council,
member
duncan
here
council
member
no
block
here,
council
member
ferguson,
the
absent
mayor
pro
tem
james.
A
A
B
So
members
of
the
public,
who
wish
to
provide
comments
to
be
read
at
this
meeting
on
matters
that
are
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
city
of
sacramento,
but
not
separately,
listed
on
the
agenda
may
complete
the
public
comment
submittal
form
available
on
the
city's
website
at
san
clemente.org
cc.
Public
comment.
All
comments
become
part
of
the
public
record
transmittal
by
4
pm
on
the
day
of
the
meeting
is
recommended.
Comments
will
be
read
publicly
at
the
meeting
up
to
the
allotted
time
limit
of
three
minutes
per
person.
B
B
And
I
don't
have
any
comments,
I'm
not
sure
if
you
guys
saw
laura
campanalo
in
the
call
as
well.
D
A
Okay,
well,
this
would
be
oral
communications
part
one
now.
Oh,
I
see
for
the
comment,
so
that
would
be
number
two
once
we
get
to
the
inclusionary
housing
program.
Thank
you.
Laura.
B
E
E
Tonight's
agenda,
we
have
four
items:
we're
going
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
background,
a
high
level
about
housing
for
the
new
council
members,
as
well
as
anyone
else,
and
then
we
will
hear
two
presentations,
one
from
jamboree
housing
and
one
from
habitat
oc.
Their
presentations
will
be
up
to
10
minutes
and
after
each
of
the
presenters
there'll
be
time
for
questions
and
answers,
and
then
we'll
have
our
consultant
for
our
update
efforts.
Economic
and
planning
systems
also
provide
a
presentation
next
slightly.
E
So,
first
I'm
going
to
talk
about
four
items.
For
our
background,
these
include
planning
for
housing,
how
it
relates
to
our
inclusionary
housing
program,
a
little
bit
of
history
for
affordable
housing
in
stanford
money
and
then
the
purpose
of
our
study
session
next
slide.
Please
planning
for
housing
starts
at
the
state
level.
The
state
of
california
has
a
housing
element
requirement.
E
E
They
provide
the
methodology
to
calculate
and
allocate
those
numbers
to
individual
cities,
and
then
the
city
of
stan's
money
uses
that
number
to
update
our
housing
elements
about
every
eight
years
and
that's
how
each
housing
element
will
contain
items
regarding
needs,
constraints,
goals
and
programs
for
housing
in
the
city.
Next
slide,
please,
and
that's
where
we
get
our
relation
to
our
current
topic
at
hand,
are
inclusionary
housing
programs.
E
E
E
And
if
we
don't
plan
for
housing
part
of
the
the
title,
but
this
is
just
what
happens
if
we
don't
plan
for
housing,
what
happens
if
the
units
don't
get
built
and
there
are
impacts
to
the
community?
Those
impacts
include
buy
right
approvals
or
automatic
approvals.
When
development
has
a
has
a
certain
number
of
affordable
units
within
the
development,
it
includes
fines,
litigation
or
court
orders,
and
even
a
loss
of
funding
for
certain
programs
that
are
currently
funded
by
the
state
next
slide
seats.
E
But
what
about
us?
What
about
stance
money?
Apart
from
the
state
requirements?
Next
slide
c,
we
actually
have
a
really
good
history
of
supporting,
affordable
housing.
We
have
a
number
of
policies
and
programs
which
we
currently
implement
and
have
implemented
over
the
years,
one
of
which
is
the
inclusionary
housing
program.
Next
slide,
please
our
inclusionary
housing
program
when
it
was
first
implemented,
15
of
units
in
a
development
to
be
affordable,
and
this
is
affordability
at
all
levels.
E
There
are
four
different
affordability
income
levels
in
2000,
we
looked
at
a
different
requirement
and
we
reduced
the
percentage,
but
it
was
a
reduction
specifically
because
the
housing
costs
at
that
time
at
the
market
rate
level,
actually
accounted
for
some
lower
income
income
levels,
but
it
did
not
account
for
the
very
low
income
levels,
which
is
why,
right
now,
our
program
requires
four
percent,
specifically
for
very
low
income.
Next
slide,
please,
as
a
result
of
our
inclusionary
housing
program
over
time,
we
certainly
have
built
a
number
of
affordable
units.
E
This
list
illustrates
projects
that
have
affordable
housing
units
on
site.
E
Although
this
list
shows
over
a
thousand
units,
affordability
will
term
out,
which
means
that
the
term
that
it
was
approved
for
say,
10
years
or
20
years
in
the
early
days
will
end,
and
so
we
actually
have
less
than
500
affordable
units
in
the
city
of
san
clemente
right
now.
Next
slide,
please.
E
I'm
going
to
throw
a
couple
of
numbers
at
you
bear
with
me,
so
why
would
we
want
to
plan
for
affordable
housing?
The
first
number
I
want
to
talk
about
is
in
relation
to
this
term
cost
burdened
households,
so
it
is,
housing
is
considered
affordable
when
you
spend
30
or
less
of
your
household
income
on
housing
and
right
now
we
have
not
quite
half
just
under
half
of
the
households
in
san
clemente
that
are
considered
unaffordable.
They
spend
more
than
30
percent
of
their
household
income
on
housing
expenses.
E
Another
number
to
consider
is
how
many
seniors
we
have
in
our
community
seniors,
because
they
typically
had
a
fixed
income
over
time.
They
will
go
into
the
lower
income
category
and
right
now
we
have
almost
a
third
of
our
community.
That's
headed
by
a
senior
the
next
number
I
want
to
look
at
is
our
draft
number
for
our
regional
housing
needs
assessment
allocation.
That's
coming
up
right
now,
we're
looking
at
over
900
units-
and
this
is
broken
down
into
the
four
different
income
categories.
E
E
So,
just
to
give
you
a
brief
overview,
there
really
is
a
need
to
find
for
housing
both
from
the
state,
but
also
for
our
community.
Part
of
that
plan
comes
through
our
inclusionary
housing
program
and
that
really
can
be
seen
with
the
affordable
housing
that
we
have
had
in
the
past.
In
san
clemente.
E
As
you
think
about
the
presentations
tonight
and
listen
to
our
presenters,
something
to
keep
in
mind
is
that
we
are
here
to
update
the
program.
Specifically,
we
want
to
clarify
the
calculation
method
for
our
new
fee
alternative
and
also
ask
whether
we
want
to
change
the
percent
of
the
required,
affordable
units
and
a
key
item
for
tonight.
Our
second
study
session
is
to
hear
from
our
affordable
housing
developers
next
slide.
Please,
and
now
that
we've
gone
through
the
background,
I
will
turn
it
over
to
sharon
with
jamboree.
C
Housing
hi,
actually
it's
laura
with
jamboree
housing.
So
here
of
course,
so
a
mayor
mayor
pro
tem
council
members,
chair
vice
chair
and
commissioners,
it's
great
to
be
here
today
again
my
name
is
laura
archuleta
and
I'm.
The
president,
ceo
of
jamboree
housing
corporation
jamboree,
is
headquartered
in
irvine,
california,
with
a
an
office
also
in
sacramento,
and
we
have
about
20
000
californians
that
live
in
our
properties.
C
Close
to
20
years
ago,
we
had
an
opportunity
to
work
with
the
city
of
san
clemente
and
the
tolega
developers
to
fulfill
their
inclusionary
requirements,
which
was
186
very
low
and
extremely
low
income
units
there,
and
we
were
able
to
get
that
development
built
in
two
phases,
and
so
we
have
been
in
partnership
with
the
city
of
san
clemente
since
the
time
that
that
development
was
built.
C
So
I,
since
that
time,
jamboree
has
just
really
blossomed
and
we've
developed
throughout
the
state
and
we've
built
a
dozen
or
so
inclusionary
housing
types
of
development,
along
with
redevelopment
projects
in
cities
that
had
large
redevelopment
programs,
and
we
have
been
very
active
in
veterans,
housing,
senior
housing
and
permanent,
supportive
housing
for
chronically
homeless
and
folks
suffering
from
mental
illness.
So
I'm
happy
to
be
here
today.
C
I
think
the
type
of
planning
that
you're
doing
in
this
discussion
is
a
great
example
of
how
to
keep
local
control
over
what
gets
developed
in
your
city
and
not
lose
control
to
the
state
or
someone
else
who
comes
in
and
tells
you
where
it
has
to
be
what
it
has
to
look
like
and
dictate
to.
You
what
you
you
know
best
and
your
community
knows
best-
should
be
in
in
your
city,
so
I
think,
building
on
staff's
report
of
looking
for
a
full
spectrum
of
housing.
C
I
would
say
some
of
the
benefits
to
inclusionary
is
that
it
is
integrated
within
market
rate
housing,
whether
it's
built
on
the
same
site
or
within
the
neighborhood.
I
think
there's
just
some
natural
benefits
to
that
for
the
residents
that
live
there
and
for
the
overall
community.
C
I
think
one
of
the
toughest
things
to
come
across
when
attempting
to
build,
affordable
housing
is
land,
and
so,
if
you're,
working
with
a
master
developer
or
a
market
rate
developer
they're,
typically
out
there
tying
up
land
and
so
by
bringing
you
in
and
partnering
with
them.
You
have
a
land
opportunity.
C
Other
cities
that
have
inclusionary
that
we've
been
successful
in
working
in
also
have
been
here,
locally,
irvine,
brea
and
santa
anna.
I
think
one
of
the
keys
to
the
program
is
having
it
be:
a
win-win
program,
where
your
market
rate
developers
are
getting
some
incentives,
whether
that
be
through
incentives
through
the
state
density,
bonus
law
or
stepping
that
up
a
bit
through
expedited
processing
or
other
variances
or
incentives
that
can
be
given
to
that
master
developer
to
help
offset
any
costs
that
can
play
to
them.
C
The
other
part
of
that,
I
think
that's
really
important-
is
that
you
have
a
program
that
the
developers
out
there
who
are
negotiating
for
land
know
what
the
program
is,
and
I
think
that's
been
really
key.
So
if
it's
10
for
very
low
and
low
or
15
or
how,
whatever
percentage
you
end
up
settling
on
that
those
master
developers
know,
and
they
can
take
that
into
the
price
of
the
land,
the
cost
of
inclusionary
housing
really
shouldn't
come
off
of
the
the
be
borne
by
the
master
developer.
C
It
really
should
be
born
by
the
entire
community
through
that
project,
and
if
you
look
at
tolega,
the
master
developer
donated
the
land
and
two
million
dollars
to
get
that
186
units
built.
But
we
were
successful
in
in
leveraging
that
you
know
probably
five
times
between
the
low
income,
housing
tax
credit
program,
the
bond
program
and
bringing
in
other
state
funding
to
get
that
development
built,
and
so
it
really
is
everybody
kind
of
pitching
in
to
get
to
get
a
project
built.
C
I
I
did
want
to
just
make
a
comment
mention
about
the
terming
out,
or
you
know,
jennifer
mentioned
that
some
of
these
affordable
restrictions
burn
off
on
units.
That's
really
important,
I'm
sure
it's
identified
in
your
housing
element
to
keep
an
eye
on
those.
The
cost
to
produce
new
units
is
far
greater
than
trying
to
keep
some
of
those
units
affordable
and
so
definitely
keep
an
eye
on
that,
because
that's
a
way
to
preserve
affordability
and
buy
those
units
before
they
go
to
market
and
your
residents
end
up
potentially
homeless.
C
So
those
are
my
kind
of
general
comments,
I'm
really
available
for
questions.
If
any
of
you
have
questions
on
how
we
get
projects
built,
I
think
you're
doing
the
right
thing
by
bringing
in
a
financial
consultant
to
figure
out
what
is
the
subsidy?
C
You
often
hear
cities
if
they
have
an
inlu
fee
option
that
that
in-lu
fee
just
sits
in
the
city
coffers
and
never
makes
it
out
to
actually
get
housing
developed.
Well,
that's
because
probably
that
in
luffy
is
not
enough
now
to
get
housing
developed
and
with
the
loss
of
redevelopment
and
some
of
the
other
state,
affordable
housing
programs.
I
think
everyone's
looking
for
tools
to
get
housing
built
so
jennifer.
Those
are
kind
of
my
prepared
comments,
but
again
I'm
available
for
questions.
A
So
I
have
a
quick
clarifying
question
when
you
talk
about
the
timing
out,
and
you
said
that
we
need
to
keep
an
eye
on
affordable
units
and
buy
them
before
they
they
come
up.
What
do
you
mean
that
the
city
would
actually
try
to
buy
those.
C
Yeah
no
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
a
follow-up
on
that.
They,
when
I
say
buy
it,
I
mean
by
the
covenants,
so
let's
say
a
unit's
going
to
go
to
market.
If
I'm
the
city
staff
person,
I
might
approach
that
owner
and
say
look
at.
We
know
your
units
are
ready
to
go
to
market
in
the
next
five
years
or
the
next
10
years.
The
longer
you
do
it
in
advance,
the
less
you'll
have
to
pay
for
that
covenant
and
say
we
really
want
to
extend
that.
A
C
Yeah,
currently,
the
funding
programs
put
the
requirements
on
them
and
in
order
to
count
them
under
your
regional
housing
needs,
there's
also
time
limits
so
our
time
requirements,
so
typically
it's
55
years
or
longer.
Sometimes
it's
65
years.
If
you
work
with
a
non-profit
like
jamboree,
we
are
we're
looking
at
permanent
affordability
and
so
we're
not.
We
would
not
be
able
to
under
our
charter,
take
our
development
to
market.
A
Okay,
so
that's
what
I
wanted
to
know
is:
if
there
is
something
happening
now,
where
affordable,
housing
that
we're
doing
now,
we're
saying
this
is
this-
is
affordable
forever.
C
Right
right
I
mean,
I
think,
it's
there,
it's
tricky
and
it
has
to
do
with
how
you
record
the
covenants
on
the
land.
But
I
think,
if
you're
looking
for
affordable
housing
forever,
then
you
can
set
up
a
program
that
does
that.
C
F
A
He
might
have
hit
the
wrong
button,
but
he
will
come
back.
Okay,
so
gene
did
you
have
a
question.
C
Commissioner,
that's
an
excellent
question.
I
think
that
one
of
the
downfalls
for
requiring
the
inclusionary
to
be
built
within
a
development,
whether
it's
a
small
rental
development
or
a
for
sale
development-
is
that
you
don't
get
the
benefit
of
the
cost
reductions
due
to
building
a
larger
development
right.
C
The
other
kind
of
layer
on
to
that
is.
If
you
go
out
to
mendocino,
we
run
an
after-school
learning
center
there.
We
have
programs
that
ensure
that
those
kids
have
a
safety
net,
should
they
struggle
in
school
and
just
runs
kind
of
supportive
programs
to
make
sure
that
they're
going
to
be
those
families
are
going
to
be
successful
in
san
clemente.
C
So
that
is
not.
You
know
that
would
be
difficult
to
do
in
a
small
kind
of
standalone
project,
so
I
do
believe
having
the
most
flexibility
in
an
inclusionary
ordinance
that
could
apply
to
any
type
of
development
moving
forward,
so
whether
it
be
including
the
the
units
within
the
project
or
building
them
off-site.
I've
seen
programs
be
successful
with
that,
where
they,
the
developer,
still
causes
it
to
be
built
or
builds
it
off-site
paying
and
in
lieu
fee.
C
That
is
enough
to
actually
subsidize
an
affordable
unit
or
again
cause
it
to
be
built
like
in
in
the
telega
case
where
they
came
to
us
specifically
after
a
couple
years
of
trying
to
do
it
themselves.
They
realized,
affordable
housing
finances
in
its
own
different
world
and
came
to
us
and
asked
us
to
build
it.
B
I
I
have
a
question
mayor
ward,
councilman
duncan
here,
laura
good
to
see
you
again.
I
just
say
I
live
in
telega
and
I
volunteered
over
at
the
at
the
mendocino
complex.
B
I
I
considered
a
great
success,
and
so
I
guess
maybe
the
the
first
question
is:
what
was
it
about
that
development
that
that
you
feel
made
it
successful
and
then
the
second
question
would
be:
does
jamboree
only
get
involved
in
those
large-scale
projects
or
are?
Is
there
a
potential
for
jamboree
to
be
involved
in
something
smaller
scale
like
you
were
just
describing.
C
Yeah,
so
I
think
that
mendocino
at
telega,
the
first
reason
why
I
feel
it
was
successful,
now
keep
in
mind
it's
almost
20
years
old
and
it
was
the
first
family,
affordable
project
built
in
orange
county
in
10
years.
So
you
go
back
10
years
before
that
and
I
think
the
reason
why
it
was
successful
from
the
beginning
was
that
we
designed
that
project
equal
to
the
market
rate
development
across
the
street.
In
fact,
we
have
lower
density
than
the
market
rate
project
developed
by
bre
across
the
street.
C
So
it
was,
you
know,
high
quality
design
from
the
very
get-go,
and
then
we
brought
in
a
very
very
good
property
management
company
who
worked
with
us
to
ensure
that
the
folks
we
were
renting
to
were
qualified
to
live.
There
I
mean
when
you
build
affordable
housing,
you
can
get
thousands
of
applications
and
you
go
through
and
you
make
sure
that
they
meet
the
requirements
and
that
they
abide
by
all
the
all
the
guidelines
in
the
property.
C
So
those
were,
you
know
some
of
the
initial
things
that
I
think
set
up
telega
for
success,
and
then
we
worked
closely
with
the
city
and
the
city
staff
to
identify
what
programs
were
needed
at
the
property.
We
work
closely
with
the
school
district
to
again
ensure
that
our
our
students
are
successful.
C
We,
I
remember
back
in
the
early
time.
Interesting
story
was
that
telega
master
development
were
concerned
that
our
residents
might
come
and
use
their
pool,
and
we
said
well.
They
should
have
the
right
to
use
your
pool
and
interact
with
the
other
residents
in
tolega,
but
we
actually
have
our
own
pool
too.
So
you
know
we
built
highly
amenitized
a
highly
amenitized
project
there
on
site,
so
our
residents
feel
equal
to
as
they
should
and
feel
proud,
proud
of
where
they
live.
C
Now
you
know
I'm
not
going
to
say
everything
has
always
been
perfect
at
mendocino,
but
I
think
it
is.
It
has
been
a
national
example
of
a
successful
project.
I
mean
I
went
back
to
washington
dc
and
accepted
an
award
from
fannie
mae
on
mendocino
because
it
was
such
a
beautiful,
well-managed
property.
So
those
are
some
of
the
reasons
why
I
think
it
it's
been
successful.
The
the
city
staff
really
embraced.
It
made
sure
that
the
community
services
staff
we
knew
what
programs
were
going
on.
C
F
Yeah
the
question
for
laura
is
since
we're
fairly
well
built
out
here
now
comes
the
the
the
trade-off
between
the
cost
of
land,
where
we
can
get
it
and
probably
demolition
or
infill.
What
is
the
reasonable
size
unit
that
makes
the
economics,
in
your
view,
plays
it?
Obviously,
it's
not
four
units
or
seven
years,
whereas
mendocino
is
over
a
hundred
yeah.
So
so,
where
is
that
cost
trade-off
break
even
number?
In
your
view,
looking
at
our
situation
here
in
santa
monica.
C
Yeah
and
I
apologize
councilman
duncan-
I
didn't
answer
that
second
part
of
the
question
in
terms
of
size,
so
we
are
doing
10
unit
developments
in
cities
where
we
have
a
project
so,
for
example,
in
san
clemente
we
could
do
a
very
small
development
because
we
would
wrap
that
property
management
into
what
we're
doing
at
mendocino
and
we
would
provide
services
at
mendocino
for
those
families
and
provide
transportation
to
get
them
there.
C
Now
if
there
was
a
city,
probably
outside
of
orange
county,
or
so
we
would
do
the
same
in
sacramento,
we
do
the
same
in
anaheim
or
irvine,
where
we
have
more
developments.
But
if
it's
a
it's
a
area
where
we
don't
have
a
larger
development,
it's
tough
to
do
that.
We
we
acquired
I'm
trying
to
think
11
units
in
temecula,
and
that
has
been
a
little
bit
more
challenging
to
even
manage
that
small
that
small
development.
So
it's
really
it's
right.
C
It's
about
scale
it's
about
presence,
and
but
I
think
it
when
it
comes
to
sacramento.
That's
a
city
that
you
know
we.
We
have
had
this
long
history
in
partnership
with,
and
I
know,
there's
been
some
challenges
there
with
the
homeless
population
and
we
really
would
like
to
help
you
know
with
solutions.
Even
if
there's
small
developments.
F
I
Okay,
mark
crandall,
commissioner
crandall.
When
you
say
attendance,
are
you
assuming
no
land
cost.
C
So,
commissioner,
it's
typically
it's
like
a
whole
layering
in
a
financing,
and
it
depends
on
what
affordability
level
you
want
it
at.
So,
if
you're
at
50
percent
of
the
area,
median
income
or
below,
which
is
really
where
your
needs
have
been
identified
by
your
staff,
you
typically
are
looking
at
very
little
if
any
land
cost
and
then
subsidy.
On
top
of
that,
so,
like
I
said
like
with
tolega,
it
was
free
land
and
two
million
dollars,
and
then
we
were
able
to
bring
in
the
other
funding
sources.
C
Yes
and
often
time,
I
see
our
cities,
our
housing
authorities
feel
more
comfortable
doing
a
long-term
lease.
So
let's
say
the
lease
is
65
years
and
the
affordable
covenant
is
65
years
and
they
know
that
at
65
years
then
they're
going
to
get
the
property
back
and
they
can
keep
it
affordable
or
do
something
with
it
at
that
point,
but
keeping
in
mind
they're
going
to
have
those
residents
that
live
there.
At
that
point,.
I
We
have
the
one
project
downtown,
it's
19
units
and
I
don't
know
how,
if
planning
can
tell
me,
was
that
land
purchased
by
the
builder,
or
was
that
given
to
the
builder.
F
E
Yeah
so
that
that
was
part
of
the
transaction
with
the
developer
that
land
at
one
point,
it
was
provided
to
one
developer,
who
turned
out
to
be
unsuccessful
in
building
the
project,
and
it
was
turned
over
back
over
to
the
city
who
then
sold
it
to
the
next
developer.
Now
there
is
a
nuance
to
land
in
these
transactions,
in
that
sometimes
they
are
are
sold,
but
within
the
the
paperwork,
it's
not
necessarily
fully
sold
and
paid
for
by
the
developer,
but
it
ends
up
to
be
a
donation
per.
J
Se,
madam
mayor,
I
have
a
question
hi
laura
question:
question
does
jamboree
do
any
market
rate
developments,
housing
developments.
C
So
we
don't
do
straight
market
rate
where,
as
a
501
c
3
were
incorporated
under
the
safe
harbor
laws
which
that
75,
you
know,
development
75
of
the
units
have
to
be
at
80
percent
or
below,
and
out
of
that
eighty
percent
twenty
percent
have
to
be
at
fifty
percent,
so
we
could
have
a
market.
Okay.
J
Thank
you
of
the
twenty
thousand
people
that
live
in
your
units.
Where
are
the
bulk
of
those
those
people
where
the
bulk
of
those
units
located.
C
So
we
have
a
a
really
good
hub
here
in
orange
county
and
then
we've
got
a
good
grouping
now
of
15
18
developments
in
the
sacramento
region
and
la
county
kind
of
spread
throughout
long
beach.
Claremont
a
little
bit
there,
two
developments
down
in
san
diego,
the
inland
empire.
I
would
say
the
areas
were
not
in
we're,
not
in
kind
of
the
fresno
central
valley,
we're
not
in
necessarily
the
bay
area,
but
we
are
in
like
we're
in
santa
clara
county
yeah.
J
Laura
I
wanted
to
ask
you
also
you
mentioned
in
your
presentation
that
to
achieve
affordable
housing,
you
I
think
you
mentioned,
forget
your
exact
phrase,
but
I
think
you
said
it's
not
fair
for
the
developer
to
bear
the
cost,
and
yet,
when
montecito
was
built,
the
developer
donated
the
land,
and
then
you
said
that
a
number
of
entities
came
in
with
financing
and
helped
you
and,
and
then
you
wrapped
up
the
comment
by
saying
it's
a
community
event.
J
Everyone
has
to
contribute
to
make
this
happen,
and
but
our
our
current
plan
doesn't
allow
for
community
involvement.
It's
really
on
the
developer
and-
and
I
guess
my
my
question
is
the
state
currently
has
with
the
programs
they
have
for
the
density,
bonus
laws
and
so
forth.
The
state's
addressing
this
this
issue
to
allow
the
larger
community
actually
they're,
not
allowing
the
larger
community
they're
imposing
that
restriction.
J
So
I
guess
I
just
was
a
little
a
little
not
concerned
by
it
raised
my
my
my
attention,
my
red
flag,
a
little
bit
if
you
will,
but
you
say
that
we
don't
want
this
bird
to
be
on
the
developer.
Everyone
has
to
contribute,
but
really
everyone's,
not
contributing.
It
really
is
a
burden
on
the
developer.
Don't
you
think.
C
You
know
what
I
don't,
and
I
appreciate
you
asking
the
question,
because
I
think
what
what
we
saw
in
telego
was.
We
saw
the
master
developer,
get
incentives
that
were
above
and
beyond
a
density,
bonus
law,
but
when
they
negotiated
their
development
agreement
and
their
land
use
agreements,
they
got
incentives
that
created
additional
value
in
that
land
and
then,
therefore
they
could
afford
to
donate
the
land
and
a
couple
million
dollars.
And
then,
on
top
of
that,
when
I
say
so,
I
don't
what
I'm
saying
is.
C
J
When
tolego
was
developed,
though,
we
had
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
acres
of
vacant
land
and
it
was
easy,
a
logical
and
appropriate
thing,
as
don
mentioned
don
braun
mentioned
we're
we're
at
build
out.
We
had
in
1980
when
we
started
our
program
and
when
you,
a
few
years
later,
when
you
built
your
project,
we
had
27
000
people
in
lots
of
land.
J
Right
now
we
have
67
000
people
of
any
land,
and
yet
our
current
program,
our
current
ordinance
and
standard,
requires
not
a
not
a
conglomeration
of
involvement,
but
the
involvement
of
of
the
developer
that
happens
to
own
a
small
parcel
of
land.
I
think
we've
addressed
that
in
a
number
of
ways
by
the
inclu
by
the
adus
and
by
the
lot
assembling
lots
like
we
just
did.
The
council
did
what
last
night,
but
it
really
is
a
burden
currently
on
on
a
on
a
developer,
to
try
to
meet
these
standards.
C
Sure
I
mean
I
think
if
you
look
at
your
your
housing
element
in
your
production
and
if
you're
meeting
your
demands,
then
you
know
then
there's
not
a
need
to
do
anything
else,
but
it
doesn't
appear
right
now
like
you
are,
and
so
that's
why
I
would
say
I
think
it's
worth
talking
to
them
now.
I
know
a
market
rate
developer
is
not
is
not
going
to
agree
with
me
and
I'm
on
the
california
bia
board
of
directors.
J
They
they
have
to
because
that's
the
standard
you
mentioned
the
meeting,
the
demands,
those
are
self-imposed
demands,
those
self-imposed
demands
can
be
unimposed
and
which
is
interesting
because
in
this
project
we're
looking
at
the
build
out
and
the
alternatives-
and
I
didn't
see
in
any
of
the
alternatives-
the
elimination
of
the
of
the
inclusionary
development
program,
which
many
cities
around
us
don't
have
any.
I
didn't
see
any
reduction
in
the
fees
at
all.
There
was
a
con.
J
There
was
quite
a
focus
on
increasing
the
fees,
so
I
I
I
guess
to
use
the
mendocino
example
that
took
place
decades
ago,
when
we
had
hundreds
of
acres
of
raw
land
to
develop.
It's
really
not
a
fair
analysis
to
what
we're
facing
today.
I
appreciate
you
mentioning
it
and
it's
you
know
it's
a
good
example
of
how
this
could
work
under
the
right
circumstances.
A
A
I
believe
you
get
funding
from
all
the
major
developers
and
and
corporations
within
our
county.
Do
you
ever
go
out
jamboree
itself
and
go
out
and
look
for
maybe
opportunities
where
there
is
some
land,
an
abandoned
church,
a
strip
mall?
Something
like
that
that
is
you
know,
yeah.
Is
that
something
that
you
that
you
do
yeah.
C
Just
so
we're
about
30
years
old,
I've
been
here
22
years
and
I
would
say,
just
within
the
last
five
years,
we've
actually
had
some
resources
where
we've
been
able
to
go
out
and
make
offers
on
land.
The
first
site
was
that
we
were
able
to
purchase
before
we
had
all
of
our
funding.
Lined
up
was
in
santa
ana,
which
we
we
had
to
buy
it
at,
like
a
market
rate.
C
Developer
would
close
on
it
quickly
and
then
we
lined
up
our
funding,
and
that
is
now
the
largest
housing
development
for
our
disabled
veterans
here
in
orange
county,
and
so
we
that
one
was
a
successful
one,
but
I
can
tell
you
it
was
very
stressful.
Taking
down
you
know
a
piece
of
land.
Before
we
had
our
funding
lined
up.
We
also
have
partnered
with
the
church
in
garden
grove
where
we
didn't
have
to
buy
the
land.
C
C
So,
looking
like
a
what,
I
would
call
a
regular
developer
where
we're
taking
the
risk
and
we're
trying
to
identify
those
cities
that
support
the
type
of
housing.
Where
we're
developing,
we
review
the
housing
elements
we
figure
out.
You
know
what
the
needs
are
and
then
we're
moving
forward
on
those
projects.
C
A
So
I
guess
san
clemente,
you
know
we
could
go
around
and
look
at
any
of
the
parcels.
You
know
adjacent
to
housing.
That
like
say
something
is
a
church
or
you
know
school
or
something
like
that,
and
would
we
be
able
to
make
that
you
know
have
an
overlay
on
that
to
where,
if
that
ever
became
available.
C
Yeah
yeah
and
I
know
cities
through
their
housing
element
process
when
you're
doing
the
site
identification
you
can
you
know
you
can
put
that
in
there
to
encourage
affordable
housing
to
get
developed
there.
Absolutely.
F
Thank
a
comment:
I
think
that
laura
brings
up
that
is
worthy
of
staff,
and
maybe
the
council
consideration
as
we
go
into
this
housing
element.
F
We
knew
next
year
was
one
of
the
things
that
got
us
across
the
finish
line
in
2011
or
12
was
in
fact
we
created
the
affordable
housing
overlay
about
that
time,
and
I
think
it
as
we
look
at
where
we've
laid
it
in
that
maybe
going
forward
it's
time
that
staff
we
look
at
that
and
where
it's
located,
so
that
we
have
more
flexibility
going
forward
since
these
arena
numbers
that
are
starting
to
flow
out
of
sacramento
and
through
the
county
are
going
to
be
a
steep
hill
to
climb,
and
so
I
just
throw
that
out
there
that
we
do
have
an
overlay,
but
maybe
it's
time
from
a
staff
perspective
to
go.
F
Where
the
overlay
related,
they
were
actually
located.
Yeah,
I
mean
there's
last
large
portions
of
the
town
that
are
not
included
in
that,
and
so
it's
something
to
consider
as
we
go
forward
as
we
have
to
update
our
housing
element
is
have
staff
look
at
where
it's
located
now
and
what
the
possibilities
are
of
expanding
it
and.
B
We
will,
we
will
be
looking
at
that
as
part
of
our
housing
element
update
and
the
current
housing
element.
We
have
a
residential
sites
inventory
list
and
we
have
to
update
that
with
every
housing
element
cycle.
So
we
will
be
exploring
all
those
opportunities
to
look
at
opportunities
and
constraints
for
any.
F
A
Yeah,
it's
a
good
conversation,
so
I
do
want
to
mention
to
the
planning
commission
that
the
council
did
send
a
letter
to
skag
supporting
a
closed
session
discussion
on
those
arena
numbers,
because
there
is
some
question
as
to
the
methodology
or
the
numbers
that
skag
gave
out.
So
I
know
most
of
you
probably
know
that,
but
I
didn't
know
if
you
know
that
we
actually
sent
the
letter.
A
You
know
trying
to
clarify
those,
because
those
numbers
are
are
very
high.
So
anyway,
you
know.
That's
that's
another
conversation,
but
it
certainly,
you
know,
is
part
of
this
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
those
numbers
get
clarified
and
are
correct.
A
So
I
do
remember
you
know
being
on
the
planning
commission
that
we
did
with
the
general
plan.
I
think
we
were
putting
different
overlays
on
and
some
of
those
one
of
them
in
particular,
I
think,
didn't
work
out
totally
for
total,
affordable
housing.
I
think
it
is
a
memory
care
housing.
A
Does
anyone
remember
that
it's
on
frontera?
You
approved
it,
but
isn't
that
bad
aegis.
B
Actually
doesn't
fall
into
a
housing
category,
it's
considered
institutional,
so
it's
not
potential.
Although
the
city
did
approve
a
project
on
that
site,
the
we
understand
from
the
applicant
that
they
are
no
longer
pursuing
that
development
and
I
believe
the
property
is
again
for
sale.
A
B
I
believe
I
believe
it
still
is
owned
by
the
church.
I
think
that
they
were
in
an
agreement.
C
A
Complete
okay,
so
maybe
that's
a
property
that
we
could
look
at
putting
an
affordable
overlay
on
again
right
don
your
chick
in
your
head.
A
That's
good
to
know
because
I
don't
think
any
of
us
were
aware
of
that,
and
I
know
that
was
the
site.
We
looked
at.
B
And
I'm
here
this
is
gabriel.
President
planner
just
wanted
to
inform
the
plant
commission
city
council.
There
is
another
presenter
that
we
also
want
to
present,
which
is
oc
habitat,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
there's
an
opportunity
for
them
to
present
on
what
what
they
provide
and
they
could
provide
for
the
city
of
san
clemente.
E
You
thank
you,
gabriel,
and
so
now
we
will
turn
it
over
to
habitat
oc
and
if
it
could
bring
up
that
their
presentation.
Thank
you.
L
Good
evening
this
is
sharon
ellis,
I'm,
the
ceo
of
habitat
for
humanity
of
orange
county,
just
part
of
a
much
much
larger
organization
called
habitat
for
humanity
international,
but
our
focus
and
our
work
is
all
done
here
in
orange
county.
So
just
a
brief
overview.
We
know
a
lot
of
people
know
about
the
name
of
habitat,
but
sometimes
they
get
a
little
confused
about
what
we
actually
do
so
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
slide.
L
L
L
So
how
do
we
do
it
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
slide?
We
build
with
contractors
which
sometimes
gets
lost
in
this
process
of
conversation,
because
what
we
are
known
for
is
the
fact
that
our
families
actually
are
building
and
we
work
with
volunteers
as
well
as
licensed
contractors,
and
we
always
have
a
licensed
supervisor
on
the
site.
L
L
What
we
look
for
when
we're
looking
for
families
as
the
need
for
affordable
housing,
the
ability,
they're
going
to
be
paying
closing
costs
down
payment
and
they
assume
a
mortgage,
and
they
need
to
be
willing
to
work
with
us,
they're
going
to
be
putting
in
500
hours
of
sweat,
equity
during
the
construction
of
the
homes,
which,
I
will
say
is
incredibly
transformational
for
many
families.
L
They
come
in
today
and
there's
a
long
process
before
they
actually
become
a
homeowner,
but
there's
a
transformation
that
goes
on
for
those
families
that
is
incredible
to
watch
and
to
see,
as
that
family
becomes
begins
to
realize
that
their
hard
work
actually
is
going
to
turn
into
something
that
will
be
of
great
value
to
them
and
to
their
family.
L
L
What
we
do
is
base
the
cost
of
housing
on
the
homeowner's
income
and
we
commit
that
not
more
than
30
of
their
income
will
go
to
their
housing
costs.
So
we
work
with
local
banks
and
help
them
secure
mortgages
through
their
local
banks
and
when
the
homes
are
sold.
So
families
live
there
10
15
20
years
and
are
ready
to
move
on
to
a
market
rate
home.
L
L
On
to
the
next
slide,
how
do
we
do
it?
What
do
we
build?
I
think
there
are
some
people
who
have
the
perception
that
we
just
build
single-family
homes
and
there
are
probably
many
places
across
the
u.s,
for
that
is
the
case,
but
we
have
built
everything
from
single-family
homes
to
a
48-minute
development
in
rancho,
santa
margarita.
L
L
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
is
always
very
frustrating
is
that
when
you
mention
affordable
housing,
there
is
this
perception
that
is
different
than
what
we
build.
So
if
you
go
on
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
an
example
of
two
homes
that
we
built
in
tustin.
L
One
is
about
1465
square
feet
and
the
other
is
a
little
over
1500
square
feet
and
these
homes
were
built
in
2018
and
are
an
example
of
a
small
infill
lot
that
the
city
of
tustin
had-
and
this
was
the
product
that
we
were
able
to
provide
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
slide,
which
is
an
example
of
a
larger
development.
L
This
is
a
27
home
development
that
we
did
in
san
luis
capistrano
and
you
can
drive
by
there.
I
think
one
of
the
incredible
things
about
this
development.
This
is
the
one
that
we
marketed
to
veterans
when
these
families
were
building
their
homes,
they
began
to
build
this
community.
L
L
So
what
you've
really
built
from
the
beginning
of
that
is
a
community
and
in
this
community
they
know
the
name
of
every
child,
every
elderly
person,
and
somebody
maybe
is
doing
something
that
mom
or
dad
wouldn't
like.
There's
a
neighbor,
that's
going
to
say
johnny.
I
don't
think
your
mom
would
like
that
and
know
the
name
of
the
child
and
the
parents.
It's
an
incredible
opportunity
for
relationship
building
and
community
building.
L
The
next
slide
is
a
project
that,
where
we
will,
we
will
be
starting
in
stanton.
This
is
a
six
home
development
and
this
is
about
a
third
of
an
acre
of
land
and
we
will
be
starting
this
one
in
january,
so
the
next
one.
How
do
we
do
it?
The
average
cost
of
construction
is
about
420
000.
L
L
L
How
do
we
sell
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
slide?
Habitat
determines
the
sales
price
from
the
home
based
on
hud's
income
guidelines
and
the
family
size.
So
I'm
sure
you
were
probably
pretty
familiar
with
that,
but
depending
on
the
size
of
the
family,
that
income
could
vary
and
the
cost
of
the
home
could
vary.
L
But
again
it's
based
on
30
of
the
homeowner's
income.
There
is
usually
a
gap
between
construction
costs
and
the
sales
price.
In
many
cases,
that
gap
is
filled
in
partnership
with
the
city,
but
we
also
are
philanthropic
organization
and
actively
fundraise
for
the
construction
of
homes
throughout
orange
county,
and
I
guess
the
last
question
of
the
next
question
is:
why
do
we
do
this,
and
I
think
this
is
part
of
what's
so.
Incredible
is
the
transformation
that
goes
on
for
our
homeowners.
L
One
of
the
things
that
they
are
doing
is
growing
equity,
they're
growing
wealth,
and
that
is
a
valuable
piece
of
information.
I
think
when
it
comes
to.
Why
do
we
build?
We
want
the
next
generation
not
to
be
a
candidate
for
habitat
for
ownership.
We
want
them
to
be
candidates
for
market
rate
homes,
so
when
we
are
looking
at
families,
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
is
kind
of
interesting
is
that
many
of
the
families
who
come
to
us
are
spending
60
70
of
their
income
on
housing
costs.
L
L
We
want
them
to
become
thoughtful
about
things
like
how
to
prepare
their
kids
for
college.
So
we
have
a
college-bound
program
that
we
provide
for
all
of
our
families,
because
we
want
that
next
generation
to
be
purchasing
a
market
rate
home
so
on
to
the
next
slide.
Why
do
we
do
this?
In
the
community?
L
Homeowners
are
more
likely
to
participate
in
local
elections,
local
activities
they
get
involved
in
their
community
because
they
know
that
they
are
going
to
be
there
for
the
long
haul.
They
want
to
participate,
they
want
to
be
involved
in
their
children's
schools
and
their
local
churches,
and
I
think
the
thing
that
is
so
powerful
for
me
is
that
it
really
helps
complete
the
housing
spectrum,
whether
you
are
a
homeowner
or
a
renter
in
the
community.
L
L
The
next
flight
is
a
story
about
raphael.
He
and
his
brother
both
attended
the
college-bound
program,
along
with
their
parents.
Raphael
not
only
got
his
bachelor's
degree.
Zelda
also
got
his
master's
degree
in
mechanical
engineering
and,
what's
very
cool,
is
that
his
brother
is
following
in
his
footsteps.
L
These
two
young
men
will
never
be
candidates
for
habitat
homes.
They
will
be
candidates
for
the
market
rate
homes
that
we
have
in
our
community.
The
next
story
is
about
another
family.
Armando
is
actually
a
young
man
who,
when
his
parents
purchased
their
home
in
fullerton,
he
was
14..
L
He
actually
moved
back
into
the
city
of
fullerton,
where
he
was
where
he
was
raised
and
he
has
just
purchased
a
market
rate
home
for
him
and
his
family.
E
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Sharon.
Something
to
think
about,
for
the
council,
members
and
planning.
Commissioners
is
how
this
might
relate,
how
their
work
relates
to
our
inclusionary
housing
program
and
in
luffy.
J
L
L
Since
then,
conversations
with
cities
are
very
much
the
same
land
opportunity
for
funding,
but
those
have
varied
based
on
the
cities
that
we've
worked
in.
In
some
cases
this
the
land
is
conveyed
to
us.
We
are
now
working
with
one
city
that
is
leasing
the
land,
so
it
it
varies
depending
on
the
city's
needs
and
what
they
would
like
to
see
happen
in
the
city.
J
Okay,
thank
you
sharon.
I
just
want
to
say
I
I
you,
your
your
projects
are
so
amazing.
The
the
work
that
you're
doing
on
a
strictly
volunteer
basis
is
is
awesome.
It's
it's
commendable
and-
and
I
just
want
a
quick
question
when
you
sell,
when
your
your
buyers
buy
the
property,
they
increase
the
equity
over
time
when
they,
when
they
buy
when
they
sell
the
property
at
a
profit.
J
Do
they
keep
the
profit
all
the
profit
or
are
they
required
by
deed,
to
sell
it
back
to
you
and
when
they
do,
when
you
sell
it
to
another
person,
do
you
sell
it
again
at
that
discounted
rate
do
do
you
have
to
make
up
the
difference
through
donations
or
how
does
that?
How
does
that
equity
loss,
equity
gap
get
filled
once
when
that
transaction
takes
place?.
H
L
At
that
time
we
share
with
them
the
equity
formula
and
they
are
purchasing
the
home
when
they
sell
it
back
to
habitat,
and
we
would
always
have
the
writer
first
refusal
and
we
would
always
honor
that
when
they,
when
we
repurchase
that
home,
it
is
based
on
the
cost
of
the
house,
the
number
of
years
that
they've
lived
in
the
home
and
how
much
equity
they
have
built
in.
So
it
is
a
shared
equity
formula
and
families
are
very
aware
of
that
and
remember
they
don't
get
the
highs
or
the
lows
of.
L
The
real
estate
market,
where
those
of
us
who
own
homes,
would
take
that
higher
low
depending
on
what's
going
on,
but
for
our
families.
That
is
an
income
that,
in
their
purchasing
at
a
discounted
rate,
so
that
that
is
takes
him
into
consideration.
So
family
number
two
will
be
in
that
same
income
range
right
and
we
use
the
hud
income
guidelines
as
our
as
our
formula.
J
L
J
Equity,
yes-
and
I
like
jennifer's
question
to
you
about
your
your
needs
in
san
clemente:
do
you
have
any
projects?
Are
you
eyeing
any
projects
in
san
committee
currently
that
you
might
need
some
assistance
on
I
mean
we've
got
one
1.8
million
dollar
fund
that
we've
collected
for
this
purpose.
That's
still
sitting
the
bank
so.
L
You
know
what
I'm
going
to
turn
that
over
to
troy
hendrickson,
who
is
on
my
staff,
who
has
had
some
conversations,
and
I
know
he's,
had
his
eye
on
a
couple
ideas.
M
Yeah
good
evening,
thank
you
for
having
us
by
the
way,
it's
a
pleasure
to
present
and
sort
of
bring
what
we
do
to
to
to
this.
This
team.
We
have
actually
had
some.
This
goes
back,
probably
I'm
going
to
say
four
or
five
months
now,
when
jennifer
and
gabriel.
Initially,
I
think,
reached
out
to
us
about
you
know
what
a
potential
partnership
might
look
like.
We
do.
M
We
have
looked
at
some
sites
and
we
were
mindful
of
the
dollars
that
the
the
city
had
in
terms
of
contribution
or
a
potential
contribution.
M
I
guess
I
should
say
that
really
sort
of
is
how
we
came
to
be
here
tonight
was,
to
sort
of
you
know,
share
what
we
do
and
and
how
we
do
it
as
sharon
said,
but
there's
one
thing:
I'm
if
I
didn't
do
just
your
question,
please
come
back
at
me
with
it,
but
there's
one
thing
that
I
think
is
in
is
important,
linda
mentioned
in
her
presentation,
the
terming
out,
and
we
actually
have
a
mechanism
to
deal
with
that
in
terms
of
that
first
right
of
refusal.
M
So,
between
the
you
know,
the
covenants
that
are
placed
on
the
homes
and
that
first
rider
refused
when
habitat
buys
that
home
back
and
we
resell
it,
those
covenants
basically
restart
so
those
homes.
When,
when
aaron
says
in
perpetuity,
we
mean
it
and
habitat
at
our
expense,
we'll
go
back
in
and
do
any
of
the
rehab
necessary
to
bring
that
home.
You
know
up
to
a
respectable
place.
You
know
whether
it
be
code
or
whatnot
and
then
resell
it.
So
again
that
is
you
know.
That
is
a.
M
I
guess
what
I
would
say.
A
difference
in
terms
of
habitat
will
never
probably
compete
with
jamboree
in
terms
of
doors
just
based
on
187
units,
but
also
as
linda
mentioned
dirt.
Is
it
a
premium
right
now
and
I
think,
we're
all
trying
to
figure
out
even
look
at
the
market
rate
builders
everyone's
going
vertical,
so
everyone
has
the
same
challenge
right
now,
but
again
some
of
the
I
think
they're
placed
the
table
for
everyone.
Frankly,
I
mean
these.
M
J
M
Yeah
we
did,
and
I
don't
have
the
addresses
in
front
of
us
but
yeah.
I
think
it
was.
It
was
something
we
had
shared
with
staff
going
back.
N
No
no
worries
hi
sharon.
Thanks
for
the
presentation.
This
is
I'm
a
member
of
the
planning
commission.
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
have
found
any
ways
to
have
the
adu
laws
that
have
been
passed
in
california
over
the
last
couple
of
years.
Have
you
found
a
way
to
you
know?
Have
that
work
for
you
or
have
that
be
a
positive
for
you
in
any
way.
L
Thanks
for
the
question,
it
is
an
interesting
conversation
and
something
that
we
have
been
interested
in
exploring
we
certainly
haven't
done
any
yet.
I
do
know
that
the
affiliate
in
monterey.
A
So
jim
going
on
that
adu
comment,
I
think
I
saw
I
don't
know
if
it
was
in
this
report,
a
comment
that
adus
are
not
very
low:
they're
they're,
moderate
cost
housing,
and
I
was
wondering
if
there
was
any
way
you
know
in
incentives,
or
I
I'm
not
sure.
If
this
is
what
encinitas
did
you
know
they
were
having
trouble
with
their
housing
element
and
they
came
up
with
an
adu
solution,
but
I
think
they
set
kind
of
certain.
They
went
ahead
and
looked
at
guidelines
for
design.
A
You
know
kind
of
different
models
and
I
think
that
some
of
those
were
a
lower
lower
price,
but
I
don't
know
whether,
if
there's
anything,
the
city
could
do
to
help
with
any
fees
where
it
would
encourage
someone
to
do
one
that
is
very
low.
You
know,
I
don't
know
if
that's
what
you
were
thinking.
N
It
could
be
I
I
would
I
mean
one
thing
I
would
imagine,
and
sharon
obviously
would
know
this
a
lot
better
than
I
would.
But
I
would
imagine
there
are
some
extra
complexity.
You'd
have
to
have
covenants
with
the
you
know,
owner
of
the
main
unit,
things
like
that
would
have
to
go
on,
but
you
know.
Maybe
there
is
some
something
like
a
contribution
that
that
owner
would
be
doing,
for
example,
so
there
I,
while
there's
some
complexities.
N
I
imagine
that
I
would
hope
that
there's
some
opportunities
in
there
as
well,
that
we
might
be
able
to
take
advantage
of,
and
if
some
of
that
is
using
some
of
the
in-lieu
fees-
and
we
could,
you
know,
purchase
some
rights
from
the
existing
owner,
for
instance,
in
order
to
build
an
adu
on
the
property.
I
have
no
idea
if
that
would
be
feasible
or
not,
but
that
you
know
those
kinds
of
solutions
might
be
something
worth
considering.
If
that's
something
that
the
habitat
people
have
kind
of
engaged
in
and
sussed
out.
A
Okay,
it's
an
interesting
solution.
I
think
that
I'd
like
to
see
staff
look
into
more
of
what
encinitas
did,
because
I
know
they
set
those
ahead
of
time,
the
the
different
designs
and-
and
I
think,
costs
or
levels
or
whatever.
So
I'm
not
sure,
I
I
think
that
satisfied
their
housing
element,
but
I'm
not
sure
so.
I'd
like
to
you
know
hear
more
about
that.
I
think
I
tried
to
look
into
it
and
I
I
I
didn't
understand
totally
what
they
did.
N
Yeah,
but
it's
still
pretty
new,
so
I
think
it's,
I
suspect
it's
it's.
You
know
we're
plowing
new
ground
with
that,
but
it
might
be
an
opportunity.
E
Okay,
madam
mayor,
if
I
may
jump
in
two
things,
one
the
solutions
that
that
jim
suggested
and
certainly
there
is
some
opportunity
within
the
new
state,
adu
regulations
around
his
solutions
and
then
for
the
solutions
that
you
mentioned.
There's
two
mechanisms
that
the
city
would
be
pursuing.
E
The
first
one
is
considering
programs
to
include
in
our
housing
element,
update
around
adu
and
then
the
second
one
is
actually
a
regional
effort
in
terms
of
creating
adu
plans,
sort
of
a
pre-approval
plan,
and
that
effort
is
being
managed
by
our
county
of
government
oak
and
so
that
both
of
those
efforts
kathy
that
you
mentioned,
as
well
as
some
potential
solutions
that
jen
men
jim
mentioned,
may
come
before
you
in
the
near
future.
A
What's
going
on
with
it,
but
you
know
with
all
the
new
laws
that
the
state
is
doing,
and
you
know
we
incorporated
some
of
them
last
night,
and
we
also
did
you
know
we.
We
approved
your
lot
consolidation
work
that
you
did
for
those
substandard
lots.
F
Yeah,
I
think
western
city
magazine
had
an
article
on
encinitas
success
story
here
about
a
month
or
two
back
that
maybe
the
planning
staff
will
look
at.
K
This
is
just
a
very
interesting
discussion
that
we've
we've
been
having
now
for
some
time,
and
I
just
want
to
share
with
everybody,
and
I
have
a
couple
questions
also
as
part
of
that
sharing,
but
back
in
march,
on
behalf
of
the
city,
I
was
sent
out
to
the
league
of
cities
meeting
early
march
and,
interestingly
enough,
the
discussion
was
all
about
housing
and
there
was
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
energy,
a
lot
of
concern
and
a
big
concern,
especially
from
those
numbers
that
that
came
out
of
sacramento.
K
We
were
all
wondering
you
know
how
on
earth
that
would
even
be
possible,
and
over
time
we
we
ended
up
coming
up
with
our
own
numbers.
Here.
Our
arena
numbers
were
kind
of
surprising
as
well,
and
but
the
the
thing
I
want
to
share
is
that
it
seems
like
we
are
working
to
serve
we're
working
to
really
address
like
a
moment
in
time.
A
snapshot,
lots
of
studies
were
done.
Lots
of
energy
was
put
into
these
studies
and
though,
clearly
we
have,
we
have
a
need.
K
I
I
question
that
need
and
what
it
really
looks
like
or
what
it
will
look
like
when
there's
some
stabilization
in
society,
at
least
in
western
society
as
a
result
of
covid,
the
discussion
happened
in
march.
K
Well,
that
model
is
changing
and
right
now
it's
it's
our
new
new.
I
don't
know
how
permanent
it's
going
to
be.
I
don't
know
how
much
of
it
will
will
stick,
but
let's
assume
some.
That
means
there's
going
to
be
a
significant
impact
to
those
numbers
that
we
all
did
our
our
math
on.
You
know
last
year
and
the
year
before,
so
you
know
we're
we're
working
to
serve
that
math
right
now
and
I've
seen
little
conversation
and
maybe
maybe
jennifer
or
laura
or
sharon
can
add
some.
K
You
know
information
to
the
discussion
here.
That's
that's
it's
more,
you
know
recent,
and
maybe
we
can
start
thinking
about.
You
know
the
decisions
we're
making
when
it
comes
to
being
so
aggressive
about
our
our
housing,
our
housing
numbers
and
and
whether
or
not
there
truly
is
a
need,
at
least
to
the
extent
that
you
know
the
mass
showed
us
you
know
a
year
or
two
ago.
K
So
I
think
that
as
I
as
I
live,
my
life
and
you.
L
K
Professionally
and
personally,
I'm
I'm
noticing
that
people
are
driving
less.
Many
of
my
colleagues
now
are
permanently
working
from
home
and
they've
always
worked
in
an
office
had
to
get
in
their
car
and
commute
15
20
minutes
an
hour
or
more
and
did
so
for
20
plus
years
now,
suddenly
working
at
home,
that's
the
new
norm
in
standard
for
for
many
companies
that
are
fortune
100
companies.
You
know
they're
gigantic
companies
and
and
much
of
their
work
staff
is
no
longer
required
to
get
in
the
car
and
and
drive
to
the
office.
K
So
their
need
isn't
the
same.
They
don't
need
to
be
within
a
reasonable.
You
know
commute
to
the
office.
They
can
be
really
anywhere.
You
know
really
anywhere
in
the
country
anywhere.
There's
an
internet
connection.
K
You
know,
so
I
think
that
is
something
that's
that's
been
not
discussed
a
lot
and
from
a
land
use
perspective
you
know
and
as
a
planning,
commissioner,
I
think
about
those
things
and
how
we
use
land-
and
you
know
how
we
need
to
use
land
are
very
important
components
to
consider.
So
I
I
think
you
know,
though
this
machine
is
definitely
moving
and
things
are
happening.
K
You
know
it
may
be
worth
a
little
bit
of
a
pause
and
discussion,
so
we're
bringing
experts.
These
are.
These
are
folks
that
you
know
know
the
latest
and
greatest
and
we're
bringing
them
into
the
discussions
to
help
our
city
make
best
decisions
for
the
community
that
we
serve.
So
I
think
it's
important,
maybe
to
think
about
how
quickly
we
make
those
sorts
of
decisions-
and
we
start-
you
know,
codifying
you
know,
code
and
all
this,
but
we're
doing
it
again
on
a
snapshot
in
time.
A
Thank
you,
mr
blackwell.
So
let's
talk
about
what
is
our
timeline
for
our
housing
moment
at
this
time.
E
This
is
jennifer,
so
two
things,
one
is
definitely
an
important
conversation,
and
I
think
that
if
we
wanted
to
have
the
conversation,
the
larger
conversation
about
housing
can
certainly
find
a
time
to
do
that.
E
E
Okay
and
let's
go
thank
you
yeah,
absolutely
and
then
so
I
I
wonder
if
I
could
suggest
asking
if
there's
any
more
questions
from
our
from
jamboree
and
habitat
oc
as
it
relates
to
the
use
of
inclusionary
housing
in
luffy's
or
the
the
program
with
the
city.
H
Sharon
and
australia-
and
you
mentioned
that
the
average
cost
for
the
unit
is
220
000,
that's
not
including
sweat
equity,
and
I
think
I
heard
50
000
plus
miners,
so
that'll
put
the
total
cost
of
construction
per
unit
at
almost
a
half
million.
What
is
the
average
size
of
your
unit
in
your
building.
L
The
average
size
of
our
units
vary
depending
on
what
we're
on
what
we're
building,
but,
I
would
say,
probably
1100,
to
1400
square
feet.
Troy
is
that
about
right
now,.
M
Yeah,
I
would
agree
with
that
probably
closer
to
the
14,
but
we
when,
when
the
when
the
lot
and
the
build
allows
for
it,
we
try
to
do
three
bedroom
two
bath
units.
So
that's
how
it
ends
up
being
in
that,
I
would
say
more
like
12
to
1400
square
foot
range
and
that
would
include
whether
it
be
an
attached
or
a
single
family
detached
home.
H
Okay,
well
so
that's
still
pretty
expensive
to
build
and
you
don't
have
that
economy
of
scale
of
a
larger
home
builders.
Now
in
san
clemente,
we
have
quite
a
few
in-field
laws
and
you
can
build
a
duplex
or
triplex
there.
What
will
make
it
work
for
you
to
come
to
san
clemente
and
do
a
project
right
now?
There
are
a
lot
of
people
that
they're
willing
to
work.
H
They
may
be
willing
to
help
to
build
their
own
homes
and
what
would
make
it
work
for
habitat
for
humanity.
M
Well,
I
doubt
I,
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
blend.
Frankly,
what
I
mean
is
you
know
we
can
if
we
can
somehow
acquire
the
land
without
any
cash
out
of
pocket.
That
would
allow
us
to
you
know,
do
something
on
the
low
side
if
there,
if
we
have
to
pay
for
that
land
that
might
require
us
to
do
maybe
a
mix
of
low
and
moderate.
M
It
like,
I
said,
there's
somewhere,
there's
the
sweet
spot
and
it
depends
on
where
you
can
get
the
land
and
what
the
desire
of
the
city
is
to
do.
In
terms
of
you
know,
income
level
of
the
families.
H
M
Well,
thank
you
very
much
understood
and
just
again,
I
think
it's
worth
mentioning
that
that's
sort
of
this
beauty
of
the
ground
lease
too
we
just
completed
a
deal
or
yes,
the
city
owned
the
land
or
acquired
the
land,
but
we
we
made
it.
We
we
came
to
terms
to
build
two
homes
with
a
99-year
ground
lease,
so
those
homes
will
be
affordable
long
after
any
of
us
are
to
worry
about
it.
H
Now
for
jennifer,
if
those
homes
have
has
a
covenant
with
longer
period
time
for
their
affordability,
do
we
get
extra
credit
to
meet
the
arena
number.
E
We
do
not
get
extra
credit,
but
it
reduces
the
number
of
units
that
we
have
to
keep
track
of,
that
are
at
risk
of
becoming
not
affordable.
A
Okay,
so
let's
move
on
to,
should
we
do
the
the
other
presenters
or
should
we
do
public
comments.
E
Yeah,
so
I
think
that
if
there
are
no
more
questions
for
habitat
or
jamboree,
we
can
let
them
sign
off
this
evening
unless
they
want
to
stay,
they
are
certainly
welcome
to,
and
then
it
might
be
helpful
to
go
to
the
economic
and
planning
systems,
presentation.
O
All
right-
well,
I
am
darren
smith
with
economic
and
planning
systems
and
with
me,
is
julie,
cooper
in
another
rectangle
somewhere
on
your
screen
and,
first
of
all,
I'd
like
to
thank
jamboree
and
habitat
for
their
presentations.
I
thought
that
was
very
helpful
and
I
certainly
welcome
to
stick
around
and
hear
what
we
have
to
say
and
chime
in
as
appropriate,
and
you
know
tell
us
we're
all
wet
if
they
think
so.
But
I
welcome
a
robust
conversation
this
evening.
O
And
there
was
a
lot
of
conversation
that
evening
and
a
lot
of
different
opinions,
and
we
understand-
and
I
can
feel
from
the
conversation
already
this
evening-
that
there
is
likely
to
be
a
diversity
of
opinions
here.
But
for
the
sake
of
our
study,
we
would
love
to
get
some
direction
about
next
steps.
O
So
this
is
a
a
brief
conversation
about
what
we
already
presented
essentially
and
a
request,
for
I
don't
know
if
a
straw
poll
or
is
the
appropriate
approach
or
or
what
but
some
direction
about
the
the
guard
rails
of
what
you're
interested
in
us
having
to
having
continue
to
explore
would
be
very
helpful
as
direction
to
both
staff
and
us
as
your
consultants.
O
So
the
three
things
that
we
talked
about
last
time,
essentially
one
is
you:
have
your
inlu
fee
again
as
a
reminder,
as
jennifer
led
off
with
you?
Have
the
inclusionary
requirement
that
you've
been
applying
as
four
percent
of
new
homes
in
in
new
developments
are
expected
to
be
delivered
as
very
low
income
units,
that
is
in
your
housing
element,
but
in
your
zoning
code
you
say
15
and
so
there's
an
inconsistency
there.
O
O
So,
if
that's
the
will,
then
it
seems
to
me
that
there
should
be
clarity
and
consistency
with
the
other
documents
of
the
city
and
again
the
the
four
percent
is
applied
as
very
low
income,
whether
the
development
in
question,
the
market
rate
development
in
question
is
for
sale
or
for
rent.
O
In
the
case
of
rental,
it
is
expected
that
that
15
would
be
divided
between
very
low
and
low
income
units
and
on
the
for
sale
side,
it's
expected
that
it
would
be
split
between
low
and
moderate
income
units
and
I'm
happy
to
talk
again
about
what
those
terms
mean,
but
I
think
there's
been
an
introduction
on
that
earlier.
O
So
again,
one
thing
is
consistency
among
your
documents
and
what
your
policy
really
is.
A
second
thing
is
what
the
in-lieu
fee
is
now
again,
even
with
the
four
percent
standard
that
you've
been
requiring
most
virtually
all
of
the
new
developments
that
you
had
in
the
city
in
the
recent
past
have
opted
to
pay
you
a
fee.
O
Instead
of
producing
those
units
within
their
project
and
there's
any
number
of
reasons
that
they
might
choose
to
do
so,
but
the
most
compelling
reason
that
they
might
choose
to
do
so
is
because
it
is
financially
to
their
advantage
to
do
so.
The
fee
that
you
have
been
charging
is
based
on
a
formula
that
is
out
of
date
and
data
that
is
out
of
date
and
is
essentially
for
a
new
single-family
home,
an
average
size,
single-family
home.
O
It
would
have
cost
say
for
for
those
four
units,
maybe
a
million
dollars
in
subsidy
required
to
do
them.
You
divide
that
by
the
number
of
units
in
the
project
and
it
comes
out
to
about
ten
thousand
dollars,
so
our
math
again,
which
we
have
vetted
with
with
locally
active
for-profit
and
non-profit
developers,
suggest
that
the
in-lieu
fee
to
truly
recover
the
costs
required
for
producing
units
should
be
closer
to
ten
thousand
dollars
than
four
thousand
dollars,
which
is
effectively
what
your
current
formula
says.
O
So
we
think
it's
important
to
have
the
conversation
about
updating
the
fees
to
reflect
modern
contemporary
cost
structure
and
think
that
that
would
be
a
significant
impact
or
increase
rather
in
the
current
fee,
but
still
well
below
what
some
other
communities
are
charging.
And.
Finally,
we
think
again,
there's
been
a
diversity
of
opinion
expressed
both
this
evening
already
and
last
time
regarding
this
one
in
particular,
but
the
four
percent
requirement
that
you
have
is
very
low
percentage
among
communities
that
have
inclusionary
requirements.
O
O
Your
zoning
code,
which
you
have
not
been
using
as
the
actual
enforcement
of
the
inclusionary
program,
suggests
it
should
be
15,
and
you
see
that
laguna
beach
is
as
high
as
25
laguna
woods,
lake
forest
and
encinitas
are
as
high
as
15..
San,
juan
capistrano
and
oceanside
are
at
10
of
all
units
as
affordable
units.
So
again
there
are,
as
noted
at
the
bottom,
with
the
asterisk.
There
are
plenty
of
communities
that
don't
have
inclusionary
requirements
at
all,
but
those
that
do
tend
to
be
higher
than
the
four
percent
that
you
that
you
have.
O
O
And
again,
it's
a
similar
story,
you're
at
four
percent
and
the
other
communities
are
again
typically
from
10
to
as
high
as
25,
and
so
what
this
means
is
that
you
know
the
the
development
we
we
shared
with
you
the
results
of
some
feasibility
analysis.
The
last
time
we
were
together
and
we
have
had
vetted
that
with
locally
active
developers
and
actually
have
had
some
continued
conversations
after
the
last
time.
We
were
all
together
that
have
further
validated
the
the
general
assumptions
that
we
have
used.
O
That
is
a
concern.
Economic
displacement,
for
those
reasons,
are,
is
a
concern
throughout
california
and
throughout
the
country.
Increasingly.
So
so
again,
in
our
perspective,
the
the
purpose
of
an
inclusionary
program
is
not
only
to
provide
housing
for
people
who
do
not
yet
live
in
your
community
and
may
be
coming,
but
also
to
help
with
people
who
may
be
already
in
your
community
and
facing
some
challenges
in
maintaining
their
homes
or
overpaying
for
the
homes
that
they
are
currently
in.
O
So
with
that,
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate
the
the
requests
essentially
on
the
the
subsequent
slide,
which
is,
we
would
love
to
have
some
direction
from
you
on
those
three
items
we
we
are
scoped
to
produce
some
additional
analysis.
Some
additional
studies,
including
reconciliation
of
your
various
policy
documents
and
the
language
they're
in
including
some
analysis
of
incentives
as
the
affordable
housing
developers,
were
speaking
to
earlier
incentives
that
may
be
offered
that
can
balance
the
the
burden
that
is
placed
on
for
on
market
rate
developers
to
provide
affordable
housing.
O
But
at
this
point
you
know
we
have
done
analysis,
but
we
need
some
direction
regarding
again
sort
of
the
the
bumpers,
the
guardrails
of
the
programs
that
you
would
like
for
us
to
continue
to
pursue,
and
this
is
not
requesting
an
action
per
se.
It's
just
we're
anxious
to
hear
your
thoughts
and
see
if
there
is
any
consensus
at
all
about
which
way
or
the
parameters
that
you
would
like
for
us
to
continue
to
pursue.
A
So,
mr
smith,
I
think
when
we
had
our
last
meeting
some
of
us
was,
we
were
looking
at
housing
opportunities
in
our
city
and
I
think
a
lot
of
us
said
that
it
was
future.
Housing
is
in
our
mixed
use
zones,
and
but
I
don't
see
anything
in
this
report
on
that-
was
that
looked
at
at
all.
O
Well,
we
have
looked
at
the
feasibility
implications
of
higher
density,
multifamily
development
and
I
think
that's
consistent
with
the
mixed
use
district
that
you're
speaking
of
we've
looked
at
the
cost
of
acquiring
properties
for
development,
and
we
know,
of
course,
that
there
are.
There
are
few
at
this
point.
Well,
mostly
we're
talking
about
redevelopment
opportunities
of
lower
intensity,
commercial
uses
as
being
the
primary
opportunities
for
intensification
and
housing
additions
in
your
community.
O
I
I
look
at
your
arena
numbers
and
I
recognize
straight
away
that
getting
anywhere
close
to
those
that
kind
of
production
is
going
to
be
a
huge
challenge
for
san
clemente,
and
I
think
that
the
the
mixed
use
and
the
affordable
housing
overlay
that
you've
got
is
a
great
first
step
and
we
have
tried
to
incorporate
the
economics
associated
with
that
in
the
analysis
that
we
have
done.
O
But
beyond
that,
I
I
can't
say
that
you
know
we
haven't
determined
that
it's
a
slam
dunk
that
that's
going
to
deliver
all
the
housing
you
need
at
the
prices
that
are
required
under
rena.
I
think
it's,
it's
still
very
challenging
to
think
about.
You
know
900
and
whatever
housing
units
coming
to
san
clemente
in
the
next
seven
years.
A
Well,
I
think
that's
what
our
issue
is
is
that
I
don't
believe
the
council
agrees
with
those
arena
numbers
I
know
so
that
is
going
to
be
an
issue
and
I'm
going
to
be
concerned
going
through
this,
that
as
we
go
through
it,
that
the
city
is
accepting
those
numbers,
because
I
I
don't
believe
that
we
are,
I
don't
think
that's
the
direction
of
the
council.
My.
O
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt.
I
I
just
on
that
note.
The
numbers
that
we
have
calculated
with
respect
to
feasibility
risk
with
respect
to
the
subsidies
required
for
affordable
housing
are
not
contingent
on
the
arena
numbers.
So,
even
if
you
think
the
number
should
be
half
or
a
third
of
what
you've
been
assigned
at
this
point,
that
does
not
affect
the
per
unit
assessments
that
we
have
done.
A
Okay,
so
I
thought
I
think,
what
we
thought
at
least
what
I
thought
is
that
you
would
look
at
the
mixed
use
and
give
us
some
feasibility
of
if
that
could
work
using
the
mixed
use
or
what
the
impacts
would
be
to
mixed
use,
because
you
know
of
parking
things
like
that,
and
so
you
know
I'm
not
sure
we're
it's.
We
seem
to
be
just
focusing
on
the
in
luffy
and
I'm
wondering
if
there's
a
reason
for
that,
because
I
think
you
know
I
know
this
is
an
inclusionary
housing
program.
A
But
what
we're
required
to
do
with
the
state
is
to
designate
land
that
could
be
affordable
housing.
I
think
that
is
our
only
requirement.
Is
it
not?
Yes,
correct,
okay?
So
what
we're
talking
about
now
is
just
if
we
need
to
revamp
our
inclusionary
housing
program,
and
so
my
concern
is
you're
not
explaining
to
us
the
difference
of
why
our
zoning
says
15
and
how
that
happened.
A
E
This
is
jennifer
I'd
like
to
jump
in
on
that,
so
we
started
with
requiring
15
inclusionary
back
in
1980,
and
it
was
only
in
2000
that
our
housing
element.
I
had
identified
the
desire
to
go
down
to
the
four
percent
and
it
appears
to
be
a
an
inconsistency
that
wasn't
the
gap
wasn't
closed,
and
so,
as
you
know,
once
you
go
through
the
housing
element
update
process.
E
A
Okay,
does
anyone
know
why
we
lowered
it
in
the
year
2000.
E
Yes,
so
in
the
year
2000,
I,
the
housing
element
analysis
had
identified
that
the
need
for
affordable
units
was
specifically
at
that
very
low
income.
Affordability
level
at
the
other
level,
such
as
low
and
moderate,
the
actual
available
housing
rental
rentals
in
particular,
could
actually
accommodate
the
what
we
consider
affordable,
rent
at
the
low
and
moderate,
so
30
percent
of
someone
that
would
qualify
as
low
income.
E
A
Okay,
so
you
know
I
have
concerns
just
changing
it.
Throwing
out
a
number
it
sounds
like
10
000
is,
is
what
you
figured
is
necessary
to
build
a
unit,
but
it
seems
to
me
what
our
shoe
here
in
san
clemente
is
land.
You
know
trying
to
identify
where
that
can
be.
So
when
do
we
have
to
have
the
inclusionary
housing
the
update,
when
what?
What
is
our
parameters
on
that
for
time?
E
Question
so
this
particular
update
effort
is
specifically
for
our
existing
housing
elements,
not
our
new
housing
element,
and
so
this
update
should
really
be
completed
before
the
end
of
next
year,
specifically
october
2021
earlier,
if
possible,
and
if
you
take
a
look
at
our
existing
housing
element,
this
particular
program.
It
was
supposed
to
be
completed
a
couple
years
ago.
A
Tonight,
it's
it
seems
like
we're
just
focusing
on
the
inclusionary
housing
percentage
is.
Is
that
the
case?
Because
that's
that's
what
I'm
hearing.
E
There's
two
questions
actually,
first,
the
percentage
and
something
to
think
about
is
if
the
city
has
the
goal
of
perhaps
increasing
the
number
of
affordable
units.
Do
you
want
to
increase
that
percentage
so
that
if
a
housing
developer
finds
an
opportunity
for
housing,
we
are
we're
making
sure
that
affordable
units
are
constructed
at
the
same
time
as
market
rate
units?
E
That's
the
first
issue
the
percentage
and
then
the
second
issue
is
with
the
alternative
that
we
provide
of
in
movies,
making
sure
that
we're
actually
providing
a
concrete
and
clear
calculation
method
and
that
we
adopt
something
that
is
actually
reflective
of
any
market
changes,
and
our
consultant
can
explain
how
we
can
potentially
build
that
in
that
over
time
the
year
the
fee
is
changed
relative
to
the
building.
A
E
Something
that
certainly
we
would
like
some
direction
on.
J
J
In
terms
of
direction,
I'm
not
interested
in
in
the
direction
of
tying
our
affordable
housing
fee
to
market
development
rates.
We're
we're
not
talking
about
development,
we're
talking
about
a
fee
for
a
goal.
Our
goal
is
to
provide
and
the
goal.
The
primary
goal
of
our
inclusionary
housing
program
is
to
to
provide
more
housing
for
people.
We
have
a
huge
housing
shortage
for
all
levels:
low
income,
moderate
and
standard,
so
housing
is
the
goal.
Inclusionary
housing
helps
low-income
people,
but.
J
J
J
This
makes
this
makes
our
projects
more
complex,
more
expensive
and
and
and
difficult
and
that's
problematic.
For
me,
I
think
we
we
have
an
option
with
with
higher
density
zoning,
where
we
can
allow
it
for
infill
projects.
The
mixed
use
is
a
great
example
of
using
property
effectively.
J
I
think
the
adus
are
a
wonderful
opportunity
to
provide
housing,
but
but
the
concept
of
increasing
the
fee,
just
because
we
can,
I
I'm
disturbed
by
it
in
the
presentation
we
didn't
have
it,
but
in
the
one
that
staff
held
out
what
what?
What
kind
of
bugs
me
is
in
terms
of
options
for
changing
our
requirements.
The
comment
is
made
overall,
the
market
value
rate
is
high
enough
so
that
it's
feasible
to
get
more
money.
J
Our
goal
isn't
to
get
more
money.
Our
goal
is
to
provide
housing.
Increasing
these
fees
will
not
produce
one
more
unit
anywhere,
so
I
think
we
ought
to
focus
on
zoning
on
on
our
con,
our
requirements
for
existing
housing
through
mixed
use
and
situations
like
that.
That's
that's
just
my
personal
personal
thought
on
it.
I
I
think
housing
is
needed,
but
again
in
1980,
when
we
started
this
the
inclusionary
housing
program,
we
had
thousands
of
acres
of
vacant
land,
thousands
of
acres.
J
You
know
42
000
people
later
and
40
years
later.
That
doesn't
exist,
so
we're
squeezing
we're
squeezing
this
program
and
it's
I
think
we
need
to.
We
do
what
we
can
to
help.
I
think
habitat
for
humanity.
I
think
the
money
we
do
have
that's
a
worthy
goal.
It's
a
free
enterprise
goal.
It's
not
a
a
an
involuntary
extraction
of
fees
from
from
private
property
developers.
It's
a
it's
a
it's,
a
philanthropic
non-profit
enterprise,
which
I
couldn't
comment
higher
so
anyway.
Those
are
my
thoughts
mayor.
K
Mere
words
is
mike
blackwell,
but
I
can
wait
my
turn.
I
don't
know.
N
N
Go
ahead:
oh
one
jennifer!
I
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
from
my
understanding
of
our
previous
study
session
in
the
past.
While
we
were,
we've
always
been
required
to
zone
for
low
income,
housing
we've
never
had
to
build
it.
We've
never
had
to
make
sure
it
gets
put
in
place,
but
that's
not
so
much
the
case
anymore,
correct,
because
there
are
penalties
that
we
can
get
from
the
state
now
that
if
we
don't
reach
those
numbers,
that
was
my
understanding
from
the
previous
study
session.
Is
that
correct.
E
That's
a
good
question,
so
you
know
penalties.
We
use
that
term,
but
in
in
the
case
of
not
building
the
unit,
it's
not
a
financial
penalty,
but
rather
it's
just
an
impact
on
our
development,
where,
if
we
don't,
if
we
haven't
met
our
low
income
numbers,
it's
easier
for
a
housing
developer
to
come
in
and
build
a
project
if
they
provide
a
certain
percentage
of
affordable
units
within
their
overall
development.
N
N
You
know
architectural
approval,
that
sort
of
thing
correct,
right,
okay
and
the
other.
The
other
comment
I
had
or
observation
I
had
was,
I
know,
there's
some
question
about.
Are
these
arena
numbers
right
or
you
know,
should
they
be
half
what
they
are
or
what
have
you?
But
when
you're
you're
asking
us,
you
know,
rightfully
you
know
for
some
guidance
and
guide
rails
kind
of
my
thought
is
is
well
what
is
our
need
here?
You
know
we
do
have
something.
N
You
know
we
do
have
businesses
in
town
that
need
a
lower
income
workforce
and
they
don't
have
that
as
available.
If
we
don't
have
housing
for
those
people,
for
example,
you
know-
and
you
know
there
are
other
reasons
for
this
housing,
including
what
the
state
might
or
might
not
do
to
us.
N
So
how
far
away
are
we
from
that
need
because,
in
terms
of
what
those
guard
rails
should
be,
if
the
deed
is
great,
then
maybe
one
thing
to
consider
is
a
higher
requirement,
as
well
as
incentives
or
whatever
the
right
mix
of
that
is.
If
the
need
is
less,
we
would
have
you
know,
whatever
you
know,
lesser
mix,
that
that
would
be
so.
I
think
that
that
would
be
helpful
to
to
understand
that,
and
you
know,
if
we're
still
halfway
off
on
the
arena
numbers,
but
we're
still
a
long
way
off
from
getting
there.
N
E
Yeah
absolutely
so,
if
we're
talking
about
where
we
are,
what
our
status
is
our
last
cycle,
we
were
required
to
plan
for
581
units.
So
just
under
600
and
we've
made
some
good
progress.
We
have
about
212
less
but
left
to
meet
the
arena
numbers
and
it
should
be.
E
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
that
that
number
has
to
account
for
the
lower
units
so
of
those
581
units
that
we're
required
to
accommodate
for
we've
gone
above
and
beyond
the
market
rate
level,
but
we
haven't
met
the
lower
income
levels,
and
so
that's
something.
That's
a
that's
a
gap
where
certainly
continuing
and
strengthening
the
inclusionary
housing
program
would
help
us
in
the
future.
N
E
Yeah
absolutely
so,
I
do
want
to
highlight
again
that
our
inclusionary
program
isn't
just
a
fee,
rather
the
inclusionary.
D
E
Program
is
specifically
and
primarily
requiring
the
units
to
be
built
on
sites
and
the
fee
is
an
alternative,
so
any
development
that
comes
into
the
city,
if
they're
building
a
25-unit
development,
they
don't
have
to
pay
the
inclusionary
housing
in
lucy.
They
could
choose
to
provide
the
four
percent
of
very
low
income
units
or,
if
we
change
it,
a
different
percentage
on
site.
E
So
what
are
we
asking
for
you
to
consider
today
is
if
we
wanted
to
move
towards
meeting
our
lower
income
goals.
Do
we
want
to
increase
that
four
percent
so
that,
if
a
project
that
was
25
units
came
in
they'd
be
doing
maybe
10?
Maybe
they
have
to
do
three
units
at
lower
income
levels
instead
of
just
one?
That
would
certainly
get
us
closer
to
our
goals.
N
A
N
F
Well,
I
guess
so
you
they're
asking
for
direction,
and
maybe
I'll
diverge
from
some
of
the
other
comments.
That
the
first
thing
I
think
we
ought
to
consider
or
give
guidance
due
to
staff,
is
the
fact
that
we
had
to
merge
the
inequities
or
the
differentials
between
the
housing
element
and
our
zoning
element,
and
I
think
we
need
in
this
complex
age.
Keep
it
simple
is
the
way
to
go.
F
The
staffing
that
that
comes
through
us
to
use
for
the
general
plan
amendment
and
for
the
zoning
part
of
it,
along
with
the
housing
elements
which
is
come
due
next
year
and
we're
already
200
units
behind
the
current
element,
and
so
we're
kind
of
scrambling
there.
But
the
biggest
issue,
then,
as
you,
the
state
could
hold
us
accountable
for
is
we
don't
have
the
plan
and
because
and
now
we
have
to
incentivize
whether
they're
going
to
come
and
make
it
build
if
they
can
build
it.
F
F
F
And
so
we
went
through
the
thing
on
avenue
cera
and
we
went
through
cotton's
point.
The
funding
for
this
stuff
gets
very
complex.
That's
why
you
hire
the
hrhs
and
you
hire
the
marlboros
and
all
that
stuff
that
know
all
this
stuff,
because
it's
a
it's
a
science
and
a
career
progression
in
itself,
how
you
put
together
the
state
and
the
federal
funding
to
make
all
this
play,
and
so
the
interlude
fee.
F
To
me-
and
I
know
some
people
are
very
reticent-
gotta
merge
up
to
about
that
10
to
15
percent
level
and
we
can
give
guidance
to
the
staff
in
the
zoning
element
make
more
towards
very
low
and
low.
But
my
feeling,
if
you've,
wanted
to
keep
it
simple
and
keep
some
numbers
out
there,
that
we
can
drive
towards
a
merge
the
two
documents
and
drive
it
into
that
10
to
15
range
and
that's.
A
Okay,
councilmember
duncan,
did
you
have
a
comment.
B
A
Okay,
so,
mr.
A
Okay,
we
might
have
dropped
them
off,
so
I
do
understand
that
our
documents
you
know
have
to
match.
So
I
just
I
didn't
expect
tonight,
and
I
don't
know
if
the
rest
of
the
council
did
that
we
were
going
to
be
asked
for
a
decision
tonight,
and
so
I
would
ask
if,
for
the
council,
is
there
any
will
tonight
to
do
that?
Or
do
we
need
some
more
information
of
what
that
that
cost
should
be?
A
My
my
concern,
just
real
quick
is,
is
what
that
would
do
to
market
rate
building
you
know
and
and
what
we've
been
trying
to
do
of
getting
el
camino
real.
You
know
with
mixed
use
to
take
off.
We
have
a
current
project
that
from
our
new
general
plan
and
I'm
not
sure
that
he's
selling
those
yet
so
the
comment
that
this
is
a
good
time,
because
the
market's
good,
I'm
not
sure
those
units
have
sold,
does
anyone
know.
F
A
But
what
we
heard
from
jamboree
was
so
successful
is
that
the
they
built
an
entire
center
that
had
affordable
housing.
They
weren't
mixed
in
with
market,
they
were
close
to
market
and
they
matched
it
and
that's
in
design,
and
that's
why
it
was
so
successful.
But
I
don't
know
for
mixed
use.
If
you
add,
if
you
make
someone
add
affordable
housing
to
that,
I
don't
know
if
that
affects
the
market
rate
of.
F
So
you
have
a
very
reduced
amount
of
land
in
the
area
in
the
city
where
we
actually
zone
mixed
use
and
a
lot
of
those
areas
are
really
you
know,
high-priced
spread
and
with
potential
for
ocean
views
and
peaks,
and
all
that
and
so
very
quickly,
it's
going
to
be
a
challenge
for
that
for
the
affordable
housing
building
community
like
the
ones
we
listen
to
tonight,
to
come
in
and
acquire
that
type
of
land
or
make
it
play.
F
So
that's
why
you
have
to,
I
think,
expand
beyond
just
mixed
use,
because,
where
we've
allowed
it
in
the
city
is
will
not
meet
our
arena
requirement,
our
present
requirement
of
212,
a
lot
of
which
is
very
low
and
low.
It's
just
not
there,
and
so
we
need
to
look
in
other
directions.
That's
just
the
political
realities
of
where
we're
at,
and
so
mixed
use
is
not
our
salvation
from
where
we
laid
it
in
when
we
did
the
general
plan.
N
It
you
know
it
it's
even
possible-
and
this
is
kind
of
beyond
the
scope
of
tonight,
but
just
an
idea
is
that
that
we've
got
that
mixed
use
along
el
camino,
real,
it's
kind
of
a
strip.
We
could
look
at
widening
that
strip
to
the
other
side
of
the
alley.
That's
or
the
paseo
that's
behind
beyond
there.
So
when,
as
we
have
a
thicker
area,
you
might
say
running
along
el
camino,
real
so
again,
I'm
kind
of
starting
to
color
outside
the
lines
here.
N
A
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
is,
you
know
I
don't
see
people
moving
from
their
homes
here
anytime
soon,
but
there
is
some
interest
in
the
adus
and
I'm
I'm
kind
of
interested
in
whether
we
could
promote
that
program
more
to
get
some
of
our
housing
and
and,
like
jim
said
earlier-
and
we
talked
about
that.
Maybe
there
is
some
incentives
and
and
things
that
the
city
can
pay
for,
but
puts
a
requirement
on
that
that
it's
for
very
low.
A
You
know
low
or
very
low,
because
I
think
that's
the
housing
that
we
need.
So
I'm
just
not
sure
you
know.
I
think
our
problem
overall
is
land.
It's
always
going
to
be
land,
and
I
don't
see
I
don't
know
of
anywhere
where
there
could
be
a
25
unit
project.
J
A
J
Abs,
absolutely
mayor
ward,
I
I
agree
with
you
there.
If
we
expanded
the
lots,
he
used
alley
ways
and
so
forth.
You
still
for
a
developer
to
say:
okay
I'll
waive
the
fee,
I'm
going
to
build
some
low-cost
housing.
You
got
to
have
a
project
20
units
or
more
and
where
and
and
then
you
get
one
unit,
maybe
that's
very,
very
difficult
again.
The
goal
is
more
housing.
J
We,
if
we,
if
we
exclude
if
we
increase
the
fee,
as
as
this
outline
when
I
read
it,
it's
focused
and
geared
and
designed
to
provide
a
rationale
for
increasing
the
fee.
We
just
collect
more
money,
we're
not
getting
any
more
housing.
If
we
focus
on
on
making
our
our
adus
and
other
sources
of
housing
available
people,
our
kids
can
now
live
in
the
town,
we
can
provide
lower
cost
housing,
there'll
be
more
people.
J
Some
people
won't
like
that
because
they
they
don't
want
anybody
else
coming
to
town
or
anybody
else
crowding
our
streets.
But
if
we
really
want
to
have
more
housing
for
people,
that's
a
great
avenue
and
that's
a
current.
That's
a
and
there
was
a
discussion
about
modern
day
versus
the
past.
That's
a
current,
modern
day
issue
that
we
can
address.
We
have
a
power
to
address
so
that
again,
that's
my
feeling
on
there.
H
H
For
example,
south
el
camino
real
can
get
a
little
more
units
in
the
pico
corridor
between
veracruz
and
la
pata
on
their
super
mars,
and
they
can
be
in
the
future
to
be
zoned
into
a
mixed-use
zone
because
some
of
those
big
big
retail
they
have
extra
parking
and
by
converting
them
into
mixed
use.
H
You
can
add
a
lot
of
housing
apartment
housing
units
there
without
increasing
the
parking
demand,
so
increase
supply
of
land
or
increase
the
available
land
for
housing
development
and
that's
one
side
of
it,
and
in
order
to
do
it,
we
also
we.
We
probably
need
to
look
at
the
development
standard,
because
any
increase
or
most
increased
fee
will
be
become
a
burden
on
developers
and
that
fee
should
be
mostly
offset
by
a
relaxation
of
development
standards.
H
So
we
don't
put
it
undo
financial
burden
on
developers,
so
increasing
mixed
use
and
utilizing
or
reforming
our
parking
requirements
is
the
way
to
address
that
and
then
on
the
other
side
we
also
need
a
more
cap.
We
need
more
money
and,
and
by
raising
the
fee,
the
currency
is
a
four
percent.
What
we
should
do
is
to
rate
the
fee
in
steps
and
then
monitor
the
result
that
will
help
to
produce
affordable
housing
with
the
15
to
be
the
seating.
H
But
it's
going
to
it.
It
will
help
to
produce
more
units
because
the
city
will
have
more
money
to
subsidize
those
organizations
and
therefore
they
can
produce
more
affordable
housing
units.
So
I
think
that's
a
two
two
prawn
approach
that
we
raise
a
fee
step
by
step
to
monitor,
monitor
the
progress
to
decide
if
we
want
to
raise
them
further.
H
Comparing
to
the
arena
units
requirement,
eventually,
city
council
needs
to
make
a
decision,
a
political
decision
that
how
much
affordable
housing
do
we
want
to
produce.
We
can
play
with
the
number
and
tell
the
hcd
that
we
do
have
enough
land,
that's
zoned
for
affordable
housing,
but
at
a
certain
point
the
state
will
look
at
the
results
and,
if
we're
too
far
off,
then
we
have
the
risk
of
being
penalized.
I
Okay,
kathy
bert
crandall.
Here,
yes,
I've
got
a
concern.
You
know,
I
don't
think
the
additional
dwelling
unit
units
really
is
a
manageable
way
of
getting
low-cost
housing
because
all
of
a
sudden
we're
jumping
into
working
with
residents,
not
developers
and
we're
getting
into
rent
control
and
trying
to
do
that
on
all
these
additional
dwelling
units,
I
think,
is
unwieldly
and
probably
almost
impossible.
Unless
it
can
be,
I
can
be
proven
wrong,
I'm
sure,
but
impossible
to
implement.
I
We
did
hear
tonight
that
probably
the
smallest
project
that
pencils,
if
you
get
free
land,
is
10
units
we're
charging
in
lieu
fees
on
people.
I
think,
is
it
four
or
six
units
who
can't
even
build
a
dwelling
unit,
so
they're
they're
out
of
the
loop
of
being
able
to
provide
a
affordable
unit
and
they're
paying
a
fee
for
it,
which
is
okay,
and
I
think
the
in
luffy
how
it's
calculated?
We've
been
talking
about
construction
cost
of
the
units
and
whatnot
it
all
comes
down
to
the
cost
of
the
land.
I
So
that's
probably
an
easier
way
to
calculate
it
that
the
internal
fees
should
help
to
subsidize
a
land
purchase,
whether
it's
done
by
the
city,
to
buy
the
land
with
that
in
luffy
and
have
it
designated
for
a
developer.
I
It
seems
that
would
work,
because
I
don't
see
that,
like
everybody
says,
unless
we
go
up
up
up
we're
not
going
to
get
units
or
projects
of
any
more
than
probably
10
to
20
units
at
the
most,
I
think
the
project
downtown
sits
on
probably
three
single
family
lots
and
they
were
able
to
get
19
units
on
it.
I
I
I
Don
is
probably
right,
you
split
split
the
difference
to
say:
okay,
ten
percent,
you
know
four
percent,
fifteen
percent,
ten
percent.
It's
going
to
be
a
guess,
because
I
don't
think
there's
a
formula:
that's
gonna
give
us
a
number
and
those
are
my
thoughts
at
least
get
the
conversation
going.
I
F
F
In
other
words,
is
there
a
simple-
and
I
think
we
all
discussed
it-
we
got
into
a
discussion
of
how
it's
currently
calculated
and
I
think
we
all
came
away
with
a
guidance
or
a
put
to
the
contractor
and
the
staff
to
make
it
simple
and
they've
come
back
to
us
and
say
make
it
simple:
we're
kind
of
in
a
doo
loop
here
of
how
it's
calculated
and
I'd
like
a
discussion
on
that,
because
maybe
it's
calculated
based
on
the
amount
of
square
footage
you're
being
built.
A
O
Yes,
I
certainly
can
thank
you
very
much.
There
are
a
a
number
of
ways
that
communities
calculate
these
fees
and
manage
their
programs.
The
way
that
you
do
at
least
the
way
it
is
written
that
you
do
is
effectively
on
a
per
square
foot
basis.
O
The
the
way
that
the
program
is
described
is
that
there
is
a
schedule
of
building
costs
that
is
maintained
by
the
building
department.
That
estimates
you
know
on
a
per
square
foot
basis,
what
it
costs
to
build
a
an
apartment,
building
versus
a
single-family
home,
and
then
you
charge
one
percent
of
that
now
right
now.
What
it
says
is
that
it
costs
150
dollars
a
square
foot
to
build
apartments.
O
In
reality,
it
costs
400
a
square
foot
to
build
apartments,
so
that
number
is
just
way
off
so
you're
charging
a
dollar
fifty
a
square
foot.
It
should
be
four
dollars
a
square
foot
even
within
your
own
approach,
because
the
the
number
is
just
simply
not
reflective
of
the
actual
economics
of
development.
O
Similarly,
on
a
single
family,
home
you're
charging
a
dollar
67
a
square
foot,
with
the
assumption
that
it
costs
166
dollars
to
build
that
again,
when
you
factor
in
the
cost
of
land
which
we
acknowledge
is
rare
and
costly
in
san
clemente,
that
figure
should
again
be
four
dollars,
a
square
foot
or
something
significantly
more.
So
there's
this
offset
between
the
the
real
cost
of
development
and
the
way
that
you're
currently
charging
it.
One
thing
that
I
think
might
be
a
helpful
way
to
kind
of
guide.
O
This
particular
part
of
the
conversation
is
if,
if
you
are
interested
in
getting
the
units
on
site-
and
there
are
pros
and
cons
to
that,
but
given
the
amount
of
land
and
the
scarcity
of
land,
if
there
is
concern
that
assembling
a
lot
of
money
and
making
that
available
to
a
jamboree
or
a
habitat
or
any
other
organization,
may
not
lead
to
a
project,
because
it's
so
hard
to
find
land,
you
may
choose
to
say,
given
that
circumstance,
we
would
prefer
that
developers
provide
the
units
within
their
project.
O
If
that
is
the
case,
if
that
is
your
policy
goal,
then
it
certainly
makes
sense
to
increase
the
fee
from
what
it
is
now,
so
that
it
is
at
least
sort
of
a
push,
an
equivalent
cost
to
the
developer,
between
providing
the
units
on
site
and
paying
the
fee
as
of
right
now,
there
is
no
incentive
to
provide
the
units
on
site
because
they
can
save
a
lot
of
money
by
paying
your
tiny
fee
as
opposed
to
producing
the
units
on
site.
So
that
might
be
one
way
to
think
about
this
question
of.
O
A
O
The
the
unit
costs
that
we've
calculated-
actually,
I
was
gratified
to
hear
habitat
for
humanity,
suggest
a
similar
number.
We
estimate
that
the
actual
costs,
the
all-in
costs
to
produce
the
unit
is,
is
a
little
over
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
the
value
of
that
unit.
The
the
effective
value
based
on
the
limited
income
and
the
ability
to
pay
the
mortgage
or
the
rent
on
those
units
at
very
low
income
levels
means
that
those
units
are
only
worth
150.
O
000
you're,
asking
people
you're
asking
very,
very
low
rents
relative
to
the
cost
of
construction,
so
the
the
subsidy
for
those
units
is
in
the
ballpark
of
250
000,
that's
the
delta
between
what
it
costs
and
what
it's
worth.
That's
the
the
250
000
number.
So
what
I
was
saying
about
the
10
000
is:
let's
say
you
have
a
100
unit
project
and
it's
supposed
to
build
four
units.
O
Then
those
units
would
have
an
implied
subsidy
of
a
million
dollars.
Four
units
times
250
000
of
implied
subsidy
per
unit,
gets
you
a
million
dollars
right.
If
the
project
is
again
it's
a
hundred
unit
project
and
they
are
not
building
those
units,
but
rather
paying
you
the
fee,
then
the
cost
to
the
city
or
whomever
to
provide
those
units
somewhere
else
is
going
to
be
a
million
dollars
right.
O
That's
the
250
000
per
unit
subsidy,
so
you
would
need
to
collect
a
million
dollars
which
equates
to
about
ten
thousand
dollars
per
market
rate
unit
in
the
project.
That
is
not
providing
the
affordable
housing
units
on
site,
but
rather
is
paying
the
fee.
So
that's
the
ten
thousand
dollar
number
and
compared
to
that
right
now,
the
city's
current
fee
would
be
charging
depending
on
the
size
of
the
project
or
the
size
of
the
units
in
that
market
rate
project.
A
couple
thousand
dollars
at
most.
O
A
Okay,
so
we
need
to
get
to
the
questions
because
we're
we're
over
on
time.
The
question
is
whether
to
raise
the
fee,
you
know
split
the
cost
raise
it
to
you
know
to
reflect
more
of
what
the
market
you
know,
what
it
costs
and
so
they're.
Looking
for
ten
percent
from
four
percent.
O
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt,
but
that's
not
exactly
how
I
would
describe
it.
It's
not
ten
percent
versus
four
percent.
The
the
ten
thousand
dollar
number
reflects
the
four
percent
inclusionary
requirement.
O
But
right
now
the
ten
thousand
dollar
number
that
we're
talking
about
as
an
average.
But
again
it
could
be
applied
on
a
per
square
foot
basis,
so
it
may
differ
from
one
project
to
another,
but
the
the
delta
that
I'm
talking
about
is
just
bringing
within
the
current
parameters
of
your
inclusionary
program,
which
is
four
percent
of
units,
are
supposed
to
be
provided
at
very
low
incomes.
A
You
know
you
showed
us
a
graph,
and
you
said
that
we're
charging
four
percent-
or
we
require
four
percent
and
then
to
raise
the
fee
to
10
to
15.
So
we're
talking
different
things
here.
I
I
just
want
to
talk
about
percentages.
You
know
what
why
we're
trying
to
get
it
to
10
or
15?
What
is
what
is
that
going
to
equate
to?
Are
you
saying
it's
going
to
be
ten
thousand
dollars
for
a.
O
O
The
ten
thousand
dollar
figure
would
again
reflect
no
change
to
your
inclusionary
policy.
You
would
still
be
requiring
four
percent
of
units
to
be
affordable
at
very
low
incomes,
but
the
ten
thousand
dollars
per
market
rate
unit
would
generate
a
sufficient
amount
of
money
that
you
could
then
offer
that
to
a
jamboree
or
a
habitat
or
some
other
organization
to
produce
the
units
that
are
otherwise
being
avoided
by
the
market
rate
developer.
O
Whereas
right
now,
your
fee
structure
would
generate
a
small
fraction
of
that
amount
of
money.
So
I
I
know
it's
there's
a
lot
of
moving
parts
here,
but
I'm
trying
to
be
as
clear
as
possible.
This
is
not
suggesting
at
this
point.
The
ten
thousand
dollar
number
is
not
implying
a
change
to
the
inclusionary
standard.
A
I
get
that
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
to
find
out
that
the
10,
what
we're
charging
is
not
exorbitant,
is
actually
for
a
very
low
income
unit
and
isn't
just
more
money
so
that
we
can
just
hand
it
over
to
jamboree.
That's
that's
kind
of
what
it
sounds
like
to
me.
That's
I'm
trying
to
figure
out.
You
know
I'd
like
it
to
be
where
the
the
charge
reflects
what
it
would
cost.
A
A
O
Gotcha,
well,
I
think
it
is
to
their
credit
that
they've
been
able
to
identify
enough
sites
to
do
on
free
land,
but
that
certainly
is
not
the
the
standard
case
for
affordable
housing
developers.
O
Very
often
as
as
the
ceo
from
jamboree
mentioned,
they
do
have
to
compete
on
the
open
market
to
acquire
land
and
pay
market
rate
prices
for
that
land,
and
that
is
a
an
underlying
assumption.
O
You
are
correct
that
that
is
a
part
of
the
assumption,
in
our
analysis,
is
that
there
is
a
cost
to
the
developer
to
acquire.
The
land
is
correct,
but
the
alternative
is
that
the
city
of
san
clemente
makes
land
available
for
free,
and
I
have
not
heard
that
you
have
a
supply
of
land
that
you
are
willing
to
make
available
for
free,
okay,.
A
Yep
we
want
to
charge
what
it
would
cost
for
that
provider
to
come
in
for
the
land,
and
I
I
don't
know
if
that's
fair,
to
charge
developers
for
for
all
of
those
costs.
I'm
I'm
not
sure
of
that.
You
know
I
thought
we
were
just
doing
it
for
the
cost
of
what
the
unit
would
be
and
trying
to
raise
that
up
to
the
actual
cost.
But
it
sounds
like
it's.
A
It's
got
a
lot
more
in
it
and
my
understanding
of
jamboree
and
all
of
those
is
that
all
of
the
builders
within
the
county
and
california,
actually,
you
know,
pay
and
and
give
money
to
these
organizations
so
that
they
can
do
affordable
housing.
So.
B
O
I
that
is
not
my
understanding.
I
don't
know
if
anyone
from
jamboree
remains
on
the
call
to
respond
to
that,
but
that
has
not
been
my
experience
in
working
with
affordable
housing
developers.
No.
A
A
E
This
is
jennifer,
so
again
you
have
two
questions
before
you.
The
one
we're
talking
about
right
now
is
the
fee
and
to
clarify
what
darren
is
describing
is
changing
from
a
generally
one
percent.
It's
not
always
one
percent,
but
generally
one
percent,
inclusionary
and
lucy
to
actually
be
a
dollar
amount,
so
it's
not
percentage
to
percentage,
but
rather
it's
percentage
to
dollar
amount.
E
And
to
answer
that
question
I
would
certainly
say
that
tonight
we've
heard
from
a
number
as
commissioners
and
councils
that
we
want
it
to
not
burden
developers
and
eps
has
the
information
to
be
able
to
show
that
in
numbers,
and
so
we
can
all.
We
can
provide
that.
A
E
Forward
in
the
report-
and
then
the
second
question
before
you
is,
you
know
where
we
want
the
percentage
of
units
to
be
definitely
some
mixed
mixed
comments
on
that.
But
I
think
that
from
a
consensus
standpoint
it
sounds
like
we
don't
want
to
just
choose
a
number.
We
don't
want
to
choose
it
based
on
our
neighbors,
and
so
I
think
that
provides
us
some
good
direction
and
feedback
for
to
answer
that
question
and
move
forward
in
producing
the
final
report.
A
K
I
I
definitely
I'm
hearing
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
good
information
about
the
need
and
percentages
and
fees,
but
one
of
the
things
that
I
keep
hearing
is
is
that
we're
going
to
be
possibly
using
land,
so
we're
going
to
be
accommodating
development
and
just
wanted
to
you
know
again,
you
know,
consider
the
source,
I'm
a
I'm,
a
land
use
planner,
that's
what
I
it's
what
I
do
for
many
years,
and
I
and
I
appreciate
it,
but
I
also
appreciate
not
developing
where
we
don't
need
to,
and
so
when
we
were
talking
about,
you
know
why
we
needed
a
major
arterial
through
town,
and
you
know
we
looked
at
at
what
we
were
going
to
lose
by
by
allowing
that
to
happen.
K
We
questioned
the
need
for
it.
I
only
suggest-
and
I'm
doing
this
because
I've
got
everybody
on
this
call
here,
we're
all
listening.
We
have
council
on
board
listening
and
we
should
consider
how
we
use
our
land
and
whether
or
not
we
really
need
to
encumber
it
when
it's
still
in
my
mind,
going
to
be
questionable
how
we're
really
going
to
have
a
need
in
the
coming
years.
K
So
again,
looking
at
old
numbers
and
old
math
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
need
is
still
there
as
we
thought
a
decade
or
even
a
year
ago
we
have
tools.
You
know
we
have
tools
like
adaptive,
reuse,
I
mean
what
are
our
vacancies
going
to
look
like
when
post
when
kovid
settles?
Are
we
going
to
have
full
vacancy
again
in
our
industrial
areas?
Is
there
going
to
be
opportunity
for
space
there?
K
K
You
know
we
have
to
consider
the
impacts
on
our
infrastructure,
our
resources
and
planners
on
this
call
understand
what
upper
limit
means
and
how
close
are
we
to
that?
So,
even
if
it's
500
units
50
units
6
000
units,
what
is
that
really
going
to
do
to
our
community?
In
terms
of
you
know,
available
resources
and
infrastructure
and
impacts
of
traffic
parking,
etc?
K
A
So
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
you
know
I
in
the
staff
report.
I
don't
think
we
had
it
in
there
that
that
our
zoning
didn't
match.
Does
anyone
have
the
page
that
it
was
on?
I
wasn't
aware
of
that.
The
fees
were
different
was
that,
in
our
opinion,.
E
Okay
and
and
just
to
clarify
just
to
clarify
the
fees
are
not
different.
It's
rather
the
percentage
of
units
required
in
each
development,
but
I
would
I
would
say
that
you
know
we
definitely
do
have
the
feedback
that
we
would
need
to
produce
that
draft
report.
E
And
then,
when
we
came
back
with
that
draft
report,
it
would
provide
a
lot
of
visual
information
to
show
and
answer
the
questions
both
in
the
percentage
of
the
number
of
units
required
in
the
development
and
then
changing
the
fee
from
a
percent
to
a
dollar
amount.
Okay,.
A
F
Well,
yeah,
just
one
more
point
that
we
touched
on
briefly
that
that
darren
hit,
because
how
you
calculate
the
scene
to
a
dollar
amount
were,
are
what
the
building
department
uses
versus
market
reality.
There's
a
huge
disconnect
there.
I
think
one
takeaway
to
staff
is
we
need
to
generate
or
go
to
a
more
dynamic
standard
of
construction,
cost
computation
and
make
sure
it's
appropriate.
I
would
refer
to
like
bart
or
some
of
the
architect
guys.
F
You
know
on
the
call
here
of
if
the
facility
department
now
is
saying
for
residential,
it's
110
square
foot,
when
you
know
it's
three
or
four
hundred
dollars
a
square
foot,
and-
and
I
can
I
can
compute-
that
from
the
house-
I'm
sitting
in
that
I
built
that
we're
way
off
and
we
need
to
come
to
some
more
dynamic
methodology
of
computing.
If
you
want
to
go
from
a
percentage
to
a
a
dollar
cost.
F
With
the
same
token,
this
per
square
foot
charge
is
some
on
some
basis
of
reality,
and
so
I
that's
the
only
thing
I
really
before
we
sign
off
on
this
call.
That's
a
very
critical
thing.
I
think
jennifer
you.
If
you
want
to
jump,
if
you
want
to
convert
this
to
all
the
dollars
rather
than
percentages
yeah,
but
how
that
dollar
is
computed
is
even
more
clear.
A
Hold
on
one
moment,
zen
wu
is
before
you
and
then
I'll
get
back
to
you.
Okay,
thank.
J
H
I
thank
you
mayor
milwaukee
and
thank
you,
councilman
knoblach,
I'd
like
to
respond
to
dan's
comment
about
the
the
baseline
building.
Cost,
not
gonna,
be
a
two
thousand
two
thousand
year:
two
thousand
u.s
dollars,
so
it's
out
of
date,
but
it
can
still
stay
the
reason
if
we
wanna
change
it
to
reflect,
say
today's
construction
cost.
H
It's
gonna
have
a
ripple
effect
on
a
lot
more
than
just
include
inclusionary
in
luffy
program,
any
residents
going
to
renovate
their
house
and
they
they
use
that
number
as
cost
basis
of
the
building
permits
and
other
things.
So
I
think
the
easiest
one
if
we
just
want
to
look
at
in
luffy
is
to
raise
a
percentage
not
not
to
touch
that
number.
H
O
Thank
you.
I
certainly
appreciate
that
comment
and
what
we
would
suggest
there
is
not
to
change
the
building
department's
building
valuation
schedule
at
all.
O
San
clemente
is
is
rare
in
that
case,
and
I
think
they
can
be
divergent
and
you
don't
need
to
worry
that
the
fact
that
we're
calculating
a
new
fee
is
going
to
affect
those
other
types
of
projects,
as
I
think
you
are
rightfully
concerned
about.
A
Okay,
councilmember
knoblach
and
then
bart
crandall.
J
Yeah
just
a
comment
when
we
when,
when
the
consultant
is
looking
for
input
from
us,
so
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
the
that
we
start
with
the
concept
of
we
have
a
fee
and
how
much
do
we
charge?
We
need
to
back
that
up
and
and
say:
do
we
even
need
a
fee?
This
is
premised
on
the
on
the
in
the
outline
in
the
discussion
tonight
that
they
will
be
fees,
fines
and
punishments.
If
we
don't
provide
this,
there
will
be
no
fees,
fines
or
punishments.
J
If
we
don't
produce
this,
many
cities
don't
provide
at
all.
We
have
a
instead
of
looking
at.
How
much
are
we
going
to
extract
from
each
developer?
J
If
we
have
a
concept
of
business
friendly,
free
enterprise,
then
we
don't
say
how
much
can
we
involuntarily
extract
from
you
for
a
good
purpose?
We
say:
how
could
we
help
you?
A
business
person
achieve
your
goal
of
getting
a
house
built
in
san
clemente
or
an
adu
built
in
san
clemente
without
taking
months
and
months
and
months,
and
thousands
and
thousands
of
thousands
of
dollars
to
do
it,
which
increases
the
cost.
J
We've
got
swimming
pools
in
this
town
that
have
that
have
been
for
for
10
months.
We
need,
I
just
think
we
need
to
focus
on
not
what
we
extract,
but
how
can
we
help
development
occur
where
it
can
occur
and
we've
got
a
built
out
town?
So
we
don't
want
to
squeeze
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
infill
and
super
high
density.
We
do
what
we
can,
but
I
I
think
we
need
to
start
from
the
premise
of
this
concept
of
fees.
Let's
look
back
and
say:
do
we
really
need
a
fee
at
all.
I
Yeah,
I
I
don't
argue
with
your
premise:
councilman
hublot,
but
any
builder
building
anywhere.
I
Development
project
has
park
fees,
open
space
fees,
they've
got
to
dedicate
x
amount
of
their
land
as
open
space.
That's
a
fee.
You
have
to
provide
amenities
of
parkland,
green
greenbelts,
etc,
etc.
This
is
basically
another
one
to
make
the
community
work
and
provide
housing
for
a
good
cross-section
of
the
citizens
of
of
the
town.
I
So
I
I
don't
like
it
really
being
called
a
fee.
It's
certainly
it
is
a
burden.
It's
one
more
of
many
to
the
developer
and
the
reason
we
got
the
the
hundred
and
some
odd
unit,
one
in
tallaga
was
they
were
obligated
to
do
it.
They
put
the
land
forward
and
said
we
don't
want
to
do
it.
Here's
the
land
do
it
here
so,
but
the
other
thing
coming
up
nobody's
ever
going
to
come
up
with
a
perfect
cost
for
what
this
fee
is.
I
There's
no
formula
for
it,
because
a
one-story
unit
costs
x
amount.
If
you
have
a
two-story
building
each
unit
costs
something
different.
You
have
three
units,
it's
more
economical
to
build
a
unit,
one
roof
for
three
units,
one
foundation
for
three
units.
So
it's
it's
gonna,
be
a
general
rule
of
thumb,
estimate
that
the
number's
gonna,
be.
I
mean
it's
not
gonna,
be
precise,
but
I
think
the
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind.
I
I
If
one
or
two
units
in
the
thing
is
low-cost
or
if
they
were
for
sale,
who's
managing
it
is
a
city
gonna
monitor
how
much
these
houses
are
sold
for
it's
a
real
problem,
so
that
needs
to
be
in
the
back
of
our
minds.
It's
not
a
question
here
tonight,
but
we
need
to
think
who's
going
to
monitor
it,
manage
it
if
small
small
infills
and
make
it
work.
J
Well,
I
I
appreciate
your
comments
bart,
but
the
fee
is
what
it
is.
You
call
it
whatever
you
want,
but
it's
an
involuntary
extraction
of
money
from
a
developer
that
that
fee
will
be
passed
on
to
the
the
buyers.
That's
how
our
free
market
economy
works
and
again,
my
comment
was
to
just
say:
we
have
a
fee
and
we're
discussing
how
much
we
charge
my
comment.
Is
we
back
up
and
say,
do
we
need
to
charge
it
all?
J
A
So
I
think
our
choice,
part
is:
if
we
don't
charge
an
inlu
fee,
we
require
the
housing
to
be
built
with
the
development.
J
That's
not
that's
not
our
choice.
Excuse
me,
but
our
choice
is.
We
have
a
three-pronged,
a
three-pronged
policy
and
program,
we're
talking
about
the
fees.
If
we
don't,
if
we
don't
handle
the
fees,
we're
not
required
to
do
either
of
the
other
two,
we
can
modify
we're
talking
about
modifying
one
of
the
prongs.
J
A
I'm
just
looking
at
and
talking
to
bart
what
what
would
our
if
we
didn't
have
a
fee
as
as
a
tool
to
try
to
help
do
housing?
What
else
would
the
city
have
if
we,
if
we'd,
have
to
require
that
that
housing
be
built
with
every
development?
I
That
yeah
yeah,
unless
there's
a
way
to
zone
it
and
make
some
other
approach
other
than
the
fee,
but
the
one
way
to
get
it
is
to
require
it
maybe
bill.
H
That's
the
commissioner,
will
I
I
think
councilman
albrecht
alluded
to
something
perhaps
a
deregulation
of
our
development
standards.
So,
but
I'm
I'm
more
more
than
happy
to
hear
on
the
idea.
J
I
say
it's
a
good
question,
mayor
ward
and
we're
not
getting
it
now
and
and
our
our
system
has
changed.
We
got
it
with
20
years
ago,
but
our
town
has
long
since
built
out.
So
I'm
not
sure
that
that
that
protocol
that
that
that
paradigm
of
of
the
three-pronged
approach
is
even
valid
today,
other
than
a
source
of
revenue
to
extract
from
the
developers.
A
Of
what
we
can
come
back,
we
can
come
back
with
darren
that
you
guys
could
go
forward
with
because
you're
hearing
a
lot
of
questions.
O
We
certainly
are,
and
certainly
a
divergence
of
opinion,
as
we
heard
last
time,
everything
from
no
program
no
fee
to
let's
ramp
it
up
to
address
our
affordable
housing
needs.
So
I
appreciate
that.
There's,
you
know
a
divergence
of
opinion
here.
We
have
produced
a
lot
of
material
that
I
think,
maybe
the
next
step
and
I
believe
jennifer
savage
was
suggesting.
O
It
is
a
complicated
issue
and
I
think
you
know
many
communities
are
looking
at
inclusionary
housing.
I
mean
there's
over
100
communities
in
in
california
that
have
inclusionary
policies,
but
certainly
not
all
communities
do
and
an
increasing
number
of
communities
that
we
work
for
are
looking
for
a
more
comprehensive
way
to
address
their
affordable
housing
need
not
solely
putting
the
responsibility
on
new
market
rate
developers
to
create
housing,
create
affordable
housing,
but
also
looking
at
a
variety
of
other
programs
and
funding
sources
and
so
forth.
That
can
spread
that
burden
a
bit
broader.
O
That
is
not
our
charge
right
now
to
help
you
with
that
very
broad
question,
but
certainly
it
is
a
worthy
conversation
to
have.
A
Okay,
so
I
think
the
comment
was
made
last
time
and
that
whatever
program
that
we
do
or
our
goals
need
to
be
focused
on
our
city,
you
know
and
and
our
constraints
and
how
it
would
actually
work,
because
I
think
that's
what
I'm
just
not
seeing
yet
you
know
I
I
do
understand
over.
You
know:
affordable
housing,
overlays.
A
You
know
we
certainly
everybody's
worked
hard
on
that.
You
know.
Maybe
you
could
come
back
where
we
look
at
opportunities.
There's
underutilized
commercial
space.
You
know,
I
know
that's
what
a
lot
of
other
cities
did.
They
looked
at,
you
know,
but
they
had
big
sprawl
and
big
commercial
districts,
and
we
just
don't
have
that.
So
you
know
if
you
could
give
us
solutions
on
on.
You
know
on
that.
You
know
I
I'm
just
not
seeing
it
yet
in
this
and
I
I
don't
think
I
can
make
a
decision
on
charge.
G
And
again
I
I
understand
I'm
being
naive,
but
not
only
are
we
working
against
an
issue
with
land,
but
I
think
we're
also
dealing
with
the
fact
of
we're
dealing
with
the
marketplace
as
well,
and
you
know
developers
are
able
to
make
more
money
off
of
other
type
of
projects
than
low-income
projects
and,
quite
honestly,
that's
what
the
free
marketplace
is
about.
G
A
Okay,
so
I
think
we
we
all
need
a
lot
more
information
and
how
this
would
work
in
our
city,
where
it's.
Actually
it's
going
to
come
to.
You
know
some
solution.
I
just
don't
want
to
say
well,
this
is
how
much
it
costs.
You
know
we're
just
going
to
charge
everyone
and
hope
it
might
happen.
I
I
want
to
see
that
it
actually
could
happen.
A
You
know
in
order
to
justify
charging
someone
that
fee,
you
know
or
other
possibilities,
because
it
sounds
like
right
now,
they're,
just
looking
for
what
the
city
of
san
clemente,
what
land
we
can
provide
and
I'm
not
sure
we
have
it.
B
This
is
gabriel
president
planner
and
as
far
as
discussion
today
you
know-
I
guess
you
know,
I
think
darren,
I'm
not
sure
if
you
have
the
information
that
you
think
you
need
from
planning
commission
city
council,
you
know
the
few
things
that
I've
been
hearing
as
as
as
staff
is,
you
know,
there's
not
necessarily
consensus
to
do
away
with
the
program
that
no
one
is
saying
to
go
back
to
what
the
zoning
code
reads
today,
which
is
15
that
either
four
percent
is
fine,
but
that
it
is,
but
you
know
it
could
be
higher
than
four
percent,
but
no
higher
than
fifteen
percent.
B
So
maybe
the
analysis
that
that
darren
looks
at
will
provide
that
information
back
to
plan
commission
city
council-
and
this
is
not
the
last
time
you'll
see
that
this
is
going
to
come
back
to
the
plan
commission.
This
is
going
to
come
back
to
the
city
council.
You
will
have
the
opportunity
to
make
a
decision
on
this
you're,
not
making
that
decision
tonight.
B
O
All
the
time
in
the
event
that
you
choose
to
have
a
fee,
that
fee
can
be
used
to
acquire
the
affordability
rights
for
some
of
the
units
that
you
already
have
that
are
expiring
and
extend
the
affordability
of
existing
units
or
acquiring
units
that
already
exist,
that
don't
have
affordability
restrictions
on
them.
But
you
could
place
them
on
them
and
so
think
about
different
ways
that
you
might
be
able
to
spend
the
fees.
O
Even
if
you
keep
them
exactly
where
they
are
now
the
breadth
of
programs
that
you
might
be
able
to
put
that
toward.
It
is
not
required
that
if
you're
collecting
a
fee
that
it
specifically
go
to
an
off-site
brand
new
construction
project,
you
can
use
it
for
a
whole
number
of
ways
to
enhance
affordability
in
your
community,
including,
as
I
mentioned,
the
concerns
about
displacement
of
your
existing
residents,
who
many
of
whom
are
cost
burdened
and
potentially
going
to
face
displacement
for
market
reasons.
A
I
would
appreciate
that
because
we
do
have
quite
a
few
senior
housing,
affordable
housing
and
I
have
dealt
with
some
people
in
the
past,
where
I
did
ask
when
that
contract
was
up,
and
you
know
they
only
had
like
another
15
years
or
so
so
I
would
be
interested
in
hearing
that
as
an
opportunity.
A
Okay,
all
right,
so
I'm
sorry
this
took
so
long.
I
think
we
all
just
kind
of
expected
some
presentations
tonight
to
hear
how
this
works
and
try
to
figure
out
how
it
even
could
be
managed
in
san
clemente.
So
you
know
so
I
guess
this
is
going
to
the
planning
commission
next
on
their
own.
A
E
G
A
Because
I
know
you
know
for
us
to
charge
a
fee,
we
really
need
to
know
why
we're
doing
it
and
what
it's
going
to
go
for.
B
Can
I
just
say
one
thing
in
parting
here
I
like
gene
struggled
through
this.
I
think
a
little
bit
and
you
know
I
think
part
of
the
struggle
here
is,
I
don't
think
anybody's
convinced
that
raising
this
percentage
or
raising
the
in
luffy's
is
going
to
solve
the
problem
right.
I
think
that's
what
we're
keeping
up
our
heads
against
it's
like.
We
don't
think
it's
actually
going
to
work
right.
So
why
are
we
certain?
You
know
if
we,
if
we
thought
that
way,
I
think
it'd
be
easier
to
come
to
numbers.
B
I
just
want
to
say
I
endorse
zen's
idea
of
of
that
as
particularly
that
that
pico
stretch
and
I
live
in
tolego.
So
I
have
a
personal
stake
in
that,
but
I
think
I
think
maybe
that's
the
way
we
need
to
think
about
it.
I
mean,
I
think,
when
I
think
of
the
projects
that
work
it's
integrated
projects
that
are
really
primarily
affordable,
housing
projects,
not
here
or
there
an
adu
here,
one
unit
and
a
seven.
You
know
an
eight
unit,
complex
like
like
you
say,
is
going
to
be
hard
to
manage.
B
So
I
think
maybe
we
need
to
come
to
an
idea
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
here
right
like
are
we
just
trying
to
say
prove
to
the
state
where
we're
doing
something,
or
are
we
going
to
actually
get
more
affordable
housing?
If
we're
going
to
try
and
get
more
affordable
housing,
we
need
to
provide
incentives
to
builders,
not
penalize
them.
B
In
that
sense,
I
agree
with
steve,
and
so
anyway
that
that's
just
where
I
come
from
after
listening
to
all
this
with
my
sort
of
layman's
cap
on
in
terms
of
this
area,
I
do
hope
for
more
direction
when
we
get
back
more
clarity
from
our
staff
about
what
they
think
will
work
and
what
won't
work
just
laying
it
out
for
us
creates
this
kind
of
back
and
forth
that
doesn't
seem
to
move
the
ball
down
the
field.
D
D
I'll
move
through
them
quickly.
First
comment
is
from
denise
fleury
and
rick
debello.
We
are
writing
to
you
to
provide
input
on
san
clemente's,
inclusionary
housing
policies.
We
have
lived
and
worked
in
our
home
in
san
clemente
for
over
22
years.
Lack
of
affordable
housing
is
a
continuing
crisis
in
california.
Cities
in
south
orange
county,
including
san
clemente,
are
not
exceptions
to
this.
D
Many
of
us
are
very
lucky
to
enjoy
a
wonderful
quality
of
life
here,
but
rising
housing
costs
increasingly
make
good,
affordable
housing
out
of
reach
for
many
of
those
who
live
in
or
work
in
our
city
about
15
percent
of
san
mini
households.
Thirty
six
hundred
have
an
income
of
less
than
thirty
five
thousand
dollars
a
year,
a
total
of
twenty
four
percent
of
households,
five
thousand
seven
hundred
sixty
or
less
than
fifty
thousand
dollars
per
year.
D
While
we
we
couldn't
find
readily
available
statistics,
the
housing
cost
burden
for
many
of
these
households
that
is
30
to
50
percent
or
more
of
income
spent
on
housing
costs
is
likely
very
high
of
the
28
753
jobs.
We
have
in
san
clemente
in
2017
an
increase
of
10
percent
over
jobs
in
2007
only
about
20
percent
of
workers,
4
554
actually
live
and
commute
to
work
within
san
clemente.
Many
of
the
rest
of
the
jobs
are
filled
by
workers
who
commute
here.
D
It
is
difficult
for
lower
wage
earners
and
other
essential
workers
to
find
attainable
housing.
Here
we
should
help
provide
more
opportunities
for
good,
affordable
homes
for
people
who
live
and
work
here,
as
well
as
for
those
who
already
work
here
and
would
like
to
live
here
truly
becoming
part
of
and
contributing
to
our
community.
It
is
good
to
see
that
the
city,
council
and
planning
commission
are
re-examining
the
city's
inclusionary
housing
policies.
D
We
support
changes
to
our
current
inclusionary
housing
policies.
We
ask
that
sanclemini
require
at
least
15
of
the
units
in
any
new
or
rehabilitated
housing
development
be
designated
for
affordable
housing
for
people
with
extremely
low,
very
low
and
low
incomes
that
better
aligns
with
our
city's
household
as
well
as
our
workforce
needs.
It
simply
is
not
possible
to
include
affordable
housing
units
in
any
given
project.
D
We
ask
that
the
in-law
fees
be
set
at
three
percent
of
the
value
of
each
of
the
market
rate
units
that
are
built
to
be
placed
in
our
special
city
fund.
These
designated
housing
funds
are
critical
to
creating
affordable
housing
elsewhere
in
the
city.
Quality
attainable
housing
often
can
be
built
by
non-profit
developers
who
understand
how
using
city
funds,
coupled
with
other
matching
funds,
can
be
used
to
accomplish
this
challenging
task.
Current
fee
levels
are
inadequate
to
support
building
up
alternative
housing
elsewhere.
D
That's
it
for
the
three
minutes
on
this
comment,
so
I'm
going
to
move
on
next
comment
is
from
reverend
kent
doss
and
rona.
Henry
welcoming
neighboring
neighbors
home
initiative
is
a
ministry
of
tapestry
unitary
and
universal
congregation.
Our
building
is
in
lake
forest,
but
our
members
live
throughout
south
orange
county,
including
san
clemente.
We
work
to
serve
and
advocate
for
people
experiencing
homelessness
or
who
are
at
risk
of
losing
their
home.
We
are
concerned
about
the
increasing
problem
of
homelessness
and
the
lack
of
attainable
housing
for
those
who
are
most
vulnerable.
D
We
want
our
local
government
to
attend
to
the
needs
of
all
of
its
residents.
We
complement
san
clemente
for
commissioning
the
inclusionary
housing
study,
given
san
clemente's,
high
housing
costs
and
significant
shortage
of
affordable
homes,
many
workers
and
families,
especially
those
on
the
lower
economic
rung
overpay
for
housing
and
struggle
financially
to
live
and
work
here
about.
One
quarter
of
san
clemente
residents
earn
less
than
fifty
thousand
dollars
per
year,
which
makes
them
eligible
for
very
low
income,
affordable
housing.
D
We
also
urge
you
to
ensure
that
alternative
sites
for
affordable
housing
are
in
high
opportunity
areas
near
schools,
shopping
transit
and
jobs.
It's
a
sad
fact
that
incomes
in
our
area
have
not
kept
pace
with
housing
costs.
Now
is
the
time
to
start
seriously
addressing
the
housing
crisis
that
is
likely
to
worsen
with
the
recent
economic
strains
imposed
on
families
and
individuals
by
the
coronavirus.
D
Please
consider
the
needs
of
all
your
residents
as
you
update
your
inclusionary
housing
policy.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Reverend
kent
doss
minister
tapestry
unitarian
uni
universalist
congregation,
rona
henry
chair,
welcoming
neighbors
home
initiative.
Next
comment
is
from
ryan
lenny,
dear
san
clemente
city,
council
members
and
planning
commission.
Throughout
my
time,
working
in
san
clemente,
I've
known
it
to
be
an
incredibly
beautiful
and
humbly
prosperous
city.
D
I'd
like
to
see
our
city
further
live
up
to
this
image
by
updating
our
inclusionary
housing
policies,
so
that
people
from
all
walks
of
life
can
call
san
clemente
home
working
as
a
surf
instructor.
I've
met
many
residents
who
fall
into
the
28
of
san
clemente
renters,
who
spend
over
50
percent
of
their
monthly
income
on
housing.
D
They
will
either
have
to
move
away
from
the
city,
they
know
and
love,
or
else
join
the
nearly
100
people
without
homes
in
san
clemente,
to
show
that
we
care
about
the
well-being
of
all
our
citizens
and
not
just
those
with
high
incomes.
I
strongly
suggest
that
we
update
our
inclusionary
housing
policy
to
require
that
at
least
15
percent
of
units
and
new
developments
are
just
are
designated
for
people
with
low
and
very
low
incomes.
D
Our
current
standard
of
four
percent
doesn't
meet
that
bar
set
by
our
neighboring
cities,
and
it
simply
doesn't
work
given
the
gap
between
land
available
in
san
clemente,
the
number
of
affordable
units
we
need
to
see
build.
Additionally,
I
believe
that
we
need
to
increase
the
inlet
fees
from
one
percent
to
at
least
three
percent
of
total
construction
costs.
The
fund,
the
funding
these
fees
will
generate,
will
allow
us
to
work
with
organizations
like
jamboree
to
create
affordable
developments
that
take
the
weight
of
housing
costs
off
the
backs
of
many
in
our
community.
D
D
I
would
like
to
provide
input
on
san
clemente's,
inclusionary
housing
policy.
I'm
a
homeowner
in
san
clemente,
I'm
very
concerned
over
20
percent
of
san
clemente
residents
have
extremely
low
or
low
income.
In
addition,
over
28
of
renters
had
a
housing
burden
of
over
50
percent
of
their
income.
I
am
also
concerned
about
the
many
homeless,
housing
and
food
insecure
residents
in
san
clemente.
I
strongly
recommend
that
san
clemente
change
the
way
it
works
with
housing,
builders
and
developers.
D
I
would
like
cinco
money
to
require
at
least
15
percent
of
the
units
in
any
new
development
be
designated
for
affordable
housing
for
people
with
extremely
low
5,
very
low
and
low
incomes,
10
percent,
if
it's
not
possible,
to
include
the
building
of
affordable
housing
on
site.
I
ask
that
the
current
in-lieu
fees
paid
to
the
city
by
the
builder
be
increased
to
three
percent
of
construction
costs.
These
housing
funds
are
critical
to
creating
affordable
housing
elsewhere
in
the
city,
often
built
by
non-profit
developers.
The
current
fee
of
one
percent
is
inadequate.
D
I
also
ask
that
san
clemente
work
much
more
proactively
with
affordable
housing
builders
to
develop
more
homes
for
people
with
low
income
in
the
city
by
creating
incentives
and
reducing
barriers
to
build
here.
The
harsh
and
cruel
comments,
behaviors
and
policies
of
the
san
clemente
city
council
in
recent
years
towards
the
needs
of
the
homeless
and
low
income
in
our
city
have
been
shamefully
embarrassing.
D
We
have
a
diverse
community
here
in
san
clemente,
and
our
housing
policies
need
to
serve
all
of
our
residents.
Cinco
mini
has
become
unaffordable
to
far
too
many
people.
Next
comment
is
from
bill
hart.
I
am
bewildered
by
the
various
recommendations
of
affordable
housing
advocates
who
simply
do
not
understand
the
law
which
law
the
law
of
supply
and
demand
when
a
commodity
grows
scarce
its
price
goes
up.
In
this
case,
the
commodity
in
cinco
mini
is
coastal
property.
D
D
It
is
alarming
that
a
dana
point
resident
one
who
has
little
regard
for
the
laws
or
economics
or
property
rights,
organizes
an
effort
to
force
sanclemente
government
to
enact
15
to
25
wealth
transfers.
She
must
think
this
is
venezuela
or
cuba,
but
then
again
this
isn't
her
town,
so
she
has
a
little
skin
in
the
game.
Social
is,
socialism
has
been
tried
many
times
and
it
has
never
worked.
I
urge
the
city
council
and
planning
commission
to
implement
a
sensible
response
to
state
requirements,
but
let's
not
go
overboard.
D
As
far
as
I
know,
our
town
still
holds
dear.
Our
american
way
of
life
next
comment
is
from
irene.
Mccoon,
affordable
housing
needs
are
at
an
all-time
high.
The
lack
of
affordability
in
our
community
is
driving
an
increase
in
rent
subsidy
request
to
our
local
nonprofits,
as
well
as
driving
force
and
homelessness.
D
During
these
times
of
high
unemployment,
the
problem
is
only
going
to
get
worse.
The
city
currently
requires
developers
to
set
aside
four
percent
of
housing
projects
of
six
plus
units
for
affordable
housing,
or
they
can
pay
a
fee
of
one
percent
of
the
construction
costs,
but
it
is
my
understanding
that
currently,
these
fees
do
not
accumulate
to
a
significant
enough
amount
to
address
the
issue,
I
would
like
to
see
the
requirement
increase
to
at
least
15
percent
or
the
fee
increase
to
to
5
percent
or
more,
to
help
address
this
growing
need.
D
D
I'm
a
resident
of
san
clemente
and
lived
in
this
lovely
beach
town
for
almost
a
decade.
I've
lived
in
many
places,
but
san
clemente
is
the
place
I
choose
to
make
my
forever
home.
I
would
love
to
be
part
to
be
part
of
the
catalyst
for
many
others
to
make
this
their
forever
home,
too.
I've
become
increasingly
concerned
about
the
problem
of
housing
and
food
insecurity
and
homelessness
for
residents
in
san
clemente.
I
listen
to
my
fellow
residents
gripe
and
complain
about
the
growing
homeless
population,
but
without
affordable
housing
available.
D
Where
can
we
expect
them
to
live?
This
is
not
someone
somewhere
else's
problem.
It
is
our
problem
and
this
could
be
the
beginning
of
a
solution.
California
has
a
crisis
with
adequate
and
affordable
housing.
Sanclemente
is
asked
to
do
its
fair
share
under
state
requirements
to
ensure
that
opportunities
exist
to
build
housing
attainable
for
those
in
lower
income
categories
in,
in
other
words,
support
our
city's,
essential
workers
and
low-wage
earners.
They
need
to
be
able
to
find
affordable
housing
here
again,
this
is
our
problem,
not
someone
somewhere
else's
problem.
D
I
strongly
recommend
that
cinco
mini
require
at
least
15
percent
of
the
units
in
any
new
development,
be
designated
for
affordable
housing
or
increase
the
current
in-lieu
fees
paid
to
the
city
by
the
builder
to
three
percent
of
the
construction
costs.
With
today's
rising
property
prices,
one
percent
is
simply
inadequate.
I
would
also
like
to
see
sanclemente
be
proactive
in
working
with
affordable
housing
builders
by
creating
incentives
and
reducing
barriers
to
build
here.
We
can
be
part
of
the
solution.
D
Let's
take
this
opportunity
to
improve
our
wonderful
beach
and
make
it
a
place
where
we
can
all
live
and
enjoy.
It
has
proved
been
proven
many
times
over
that
one
of
the
first
steps
in
solving
the
homeless
problem
is
to
provide
shelter.
Affordable
housing
is
the
right
solution
again.
This
is
our
problem,
not
someone
somewhere
else's
problem.
D
My
name
is
kathy
aschoffny,
I'm
a
resident
of
san
clemente,
my
husband
and
I
love
our
community,
but
we
are
troubled
by
the
serious
lack
of
affordable
housing
here.
Twenty
percent
of
san
clemente
families
have
incomes
categorized
as
low
or
extremely
low,
and
the
lack
of
affordable
homes
for
these
families
leads
to
financial
stress
overcrowding
and
homelessness.
D
I
urge
city
leaders
to
enact
specific
changes
to
our
inclusionary
ordinance
that
will
make
the
ordinance
truly
robust
and
lead
to
the
creation
of
more
affordable
housing.
First,
I
urge
you
to
significantly
increase
the
amount
of
affordable
units
required
in
new
developments,
rather
than
the
current
requirement
that
just
four
percent
of
the
units
be
set
aside
is
affordable
in
a
project
of
six
units
or
more.
I
believe
san
clemente
should
require
developers
to
make
at
least
15
of
the
new
units
affordable
to
lower
income
households.
D
More
specifically,
five
percent
of
the
new
units
should
be
affordable
to
extremely
low
income
families,
five
percent
to
very
low
income
and
five
percent
to
low
income.
Second,
I
urge
you
to
increase
the
inlay
fees
developers
pay
as
an
alternative
to
providing
on-site
affordable
units.
The
current
rate
of
just
one
percent
of
construction
costs
is
way
too
low
in
lieu
fees
should
be
high
enough
to
pay
to
be
a
fair
substitute
for
providing
on-site.
Affordable
units
more
over
in
lieu
fees
should
be
high
enough
to
generate
funds.
D
Sanclemente
can
use
to
help
support,
affordable
housing
construction
in
the
city.
I
urge
you
to
increase
in-lieu
fees
to
at
least
three
percent
of
construction
costs.
If
the
city
makes
these
two
improvements
in
its
inclusionary
ordinance,
increasing
emily
fees
and
increasing
the
amount
of
affordable
units
required
in
a
development,
san
clemente
will
show
it
is
truly
committed
to
meeting
the
affordable
housing
needs
of
its
residents.
Thank
you.
D
The
building
industry
association
of
southern
california
orange
county
chapter
is
a
non-profit
trade
association
of
over
1100
member
companies
employing
over
100
000
people
in
the
home
building
industry.
Housing
remains
a
critical
issue
in
california,
with
the
situation
growing
more
serious
with
each
passing
day.
Studies
show
that
the
state
needs
over
180
000
new
units
each
year
and
at
best
we
are
producing
80
000.
This
has
caused
a
cascading
spike
in
home
prices
across
the
region.
D
D
In
a
study
by
benjamin
powell,
phd
and
edward
string
and
phd
titled
housing
supply
and
affordability
do
affordable
housing
mandates
work.
The
authors
discovered
that
in
the
45
cities,
where
data
was
available,
new
housing
production
drastically
decreased
by
an
average
of
31
percent
within
one
year
of
adopting
inclusionary
housing
policies.
D
Additionally,
the
study
suggested
inclusionary
housing
policies
can
increase
new
housing
costs
by
22
to
40,
but
excuse
me
by
22
000
to
44
000,
with
higher
priced
markets
increasing
by
100
000,
supporting
these
conclusions.
In
a
recent
report
from
the
legislative
analyst
office,
titled
perspectives
on
helping
low-income
californians
afford
housing.
D
In
this
report,
it
states
attempting
to
address
the
state's
affordability
challenges,
primarily
through
expansion
of
government
programs
likely
would
be
impractical
further
that
extending
housing
assistance
to
low-income
californians,
who
currently
do
not
receive
it
either
through
subsidies
for
for
affordable
units
or
housing
vouchers,
would
require
an
annual
funding
commitment
in
the
low
tens
of
billions
of
dollars.
As
such,
it
finds
that
many
housing
programs
vouchers
rent
control
and
inclusionary
housing
attempt
to
make
housing
more
affordable
without
increasing
the
overall
supply
of
housing.
D
This
approach
does
very
little
to
address
the
underlying
cause
of
california's
high
housing
costs,
a
housing
shortage,
foundations
of
the
policy
set
aside.
The
entire
globe
has
been
thrust
into
the
middle
of
a
pandemic
residents
around
the
country,
especially
in
california,
are
being
asked
to
self-quarantine
and,
by
extension,
limit
their
access
to
work.
D
The
economic
impact
of
this
pandemic
will
take
years
to
fully
comprehend
because
of
this
cities
throughout
orange
county
are
now
looking
at
ways
to
reduce
regulations
and
costs
associated
with
developing
housing
as
a
means
of
spurring
economic
activity
and
to
create
new
units.
It's
important
to
note
that,
just
recently,
the
city
of
santa
ana
voted
to
reduce
their
inclusionary
zoning
fee
by
66
percent,
because
not
one
permit
has
been
pulled
since
they
increased
the
fee
in
2015.
D
D
Comment,
I
have
one
more,
I'm
just
pulling
it
actually
two
more
one.
Second
here
next
comment
is
from
the
kennedy
commission.
D
The
kennedy
commission
is
a
broad-based
coalition
of
residents
and
community
organizations
that
that
advocates
for
the
production
of
homes,
affordable
for
families
earning
less
than
27
000
annually
in
orange
county
formed
in
2001.
The
commission
has
been
successful
in
partnering
and
working
with
orange
county
jurisdictions
to
create
effective
housing
and
land
use
policies.
That's
led
to
the
new
construction
of
homes
affordable
to
lower
income
working
families.
The
commission
is
writing
to
provide
comments
on
the
city
of
san
clemente's,
inclusionary
housing
program
and
in
lieu
fee
update.
D
We
have
not
had
the
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
city
stakeholder
meetings
on
this
issue.
We
would
welcome
the
opportunity
to
ensure
that
our
perspective
is
considered.
The
city's
current
inclusionary
housing
program
requires
that
projects
with
more
than
six
units
provide
four
percent,
affordable
rental
units
for
very
low
income,
households
earning
50
percent
or
less
of
the
area's
median
income
ami
or
the
pay
in
luffy.
D
The
current
in
luffy
is
very
low,
based
on
one
percent
of
construction
value
and
compared
to
four
percent
of
the
subsidy
needed
to
develop
an
affordable
unit
to
ensure
it
corresponds
with
the
current
affordability
gap.
The
current
inclusionary
housing
program
has
not
been
effective
in
addressing
the
city's
housing
needs
in
a
balanced
way
for
the
2014
to
2021
housing
element
planning
period.
D
The
city
has
arena
of
134
very
low
and
95
low
and
communities
per
arena
allocation,
progress
reports,
progress
reports
submitted
by
the
city,
the
city
has
built
69
or
40
46
of
the
134,
very
low
income
units
and
28
or
29
of
the
95
low
income
units.
However,
for
the
above
moderate
income
units,
the
city
outperformed
and
exceeded
the
arena
by
conducting
by
constructing
519
or
213
of
the
244
above
moderate
income
units,
while
33
above
moderate
units
were
added
in
2019,
no
units
were
added
at
the
very
low
and
low
income
levels.
D
In
the
same
year,
the
san
clemente's
inclusionary
programs
is
deficit,
is
deficient
in
its
two
main
components.
The
four
percent
inclusionary
is
willfully
below
the
standard
used
by
most
cities
in
orange,
county
and
regionally.
As
highlighted
in
the
consultant's
analysis,
the
inclusionary
percentage
range
for
most
of
these
programs
is
around
15
and
very
and
low
very
low
and
extremely
low.
In
addition,
the
inlet
calculation
in
lieu
fee
calculation
also
is
well
below
the
gap
finance
subsidy
to
create
affordable
housing
that
is
not
built
as
part
of
the
development.
D
The
eps
analysis
highlights
that
the
inclusionary
fee
needs
to
be
at
four
percent
of
construction
value
to
represent
the
ten
thousand
three
hundred
five
gap:
subsidy
needed
for
affordable
housing,
the
average
blue
fees
in
inclusionary
programs
in
orange
county
average
around
ten
thousand
fifteen
thousand
dollars
per
unit
with
the
remaining
fifth
cycle.
Arena
need
of
136,
lower
income
homes,
an
additional
440
441
coming
in
the
sixth
cycle
update.
It
is
important.
D
The
city
prioritize,
the
development
of
new
affordable
homes
by
amending
and
strengthening
its
inclusionary
housing
program
to
prioritize
housing,
production
for
low,
very
low
and
extremely
low
households
at
a
15
requirement.
The
three
minutes
is
up
on
that
comment.
So
I'm
going
to
move
on
to
our
final
comment.
D
K
A
A
Okay,
would
someone
from
the
city
council
like
to
do
the
adjournment,
or
I
can
do
that.
J
A
No
I'll
just
say
that
we'll
adjourn
to
the
next
regular
city
council
meeting
and
scheduled
to
take
place
on
january
19th
2021
via
teleconference,
closed
session
items
will
be
considered
at
five
o'clock
p.m,
and
the
regular
business
meeting
will
commence
at
six
o'clock
p.m.
A
You
saw
second
that
second,
second,
thank
you.
Gene
just
take
a
straw.
Let's
take
a
vote
really
quick.
Who
do
we
have
left
councilmember
duncan.
B
A
Count
mayor
pro-tem
james.
B
N
B
N
Question
by
ruling
second
by
brown,
I'll
call
the
roll
for
the
vote.
Commissioner
crandall
aye
commissioner
brown
aye
commissioner
blackwell
aye,
commissioner
wu.
A
Okay,
so
thank
you,
everyone,
darren
and
julie
for
joining
us
and
jennifer
and
gabriel,
am
I
leaving
out
any
other
stuff,
oh
cecilia
and
scott
smith
and
mr
sun.
Thank
you
for
being
with
us
and
I
hope
we
get
somewhere
on
this
good.