My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
2005 AGN JUN 07 Informational
Colton
>
CITY CLERK
>
City Council Agendas
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2009
>
2005
>
2005 June 7 Agenda Packet
>
2005 AGN JUN 07 Informational
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2014 12:42:12 PM
Creation date
2/20/2014 2:05:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General Documents
Created By
avillalba
DocType
Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MAYOR <br />Dolrtir. I L Rcnncu <br />RDA Chair <br />MAYOR PRO TEM <br />1ldun %. Rnmu. <br />COUNCIL MEMBERS <br />Ranv n, \I. 11, <br />Dnm't I <br />June 2, 2005 <br />Senator Dennis Hollingsworth <br />State Capitol, Room 5064 <br />Sacramento, CA 95814 <br />RE: SB 435 (Hollingsworth) Density Bonus Law <br />Notice of Opposition <br />Dear Senator Hollingsworth: <br />The City of Colton OPPOSES SB 435 (Hollingsworth), because it compounds some of the <br />problems created by last year's controversial SB 1818 (Hollingsworth), which required <br />communities to provide up to three concessions and 35% density bonuses to developers, while <br />reducing the amount of affordable housing that a developer was required to provide compared <br />to the prior law. <br />Isd,.,rd V D, I.'R , Since its enactment, SB 1818 has created much uncertainty and confusion among local planners <br />Da r; z and attorneys as to how to implement its provisions, and harmonize them with other state laws <br />I:dh I, h;,,,,,,,, and local requirements. <br />D"mo 3 <br />Ili L„ \ R.,,,,,, This year's SB 435 (Hollingsworth), compounds upon the flaws of the earlier measure by: <br />D3t,,o a 1) Requiring local governments to provide a fourth concession, when the developer uses <br />RI' ` c,t, ` h"', less than 50% of the density bonus. <br />„h„ D ah d"11 2) Removing the existing requirement for a developer to demonstrate that a requested <br />r>,^ waiver or reduction in development standards is necessary to make the units <br />T st, h;1 economically feasible. <br />Dsin,16 3) Deleting some key language in the law which city attorneys were using as a defense <br />against the law's applicability to local inclusionary zoning programs. <br />CITY MANAGER For these reasons the City of Colton is opposed to SB 435. <br />D.ucl �. Parri.h <br />Deirdre H. Bennett <br />Mayor <br />City of Colton <br />cc: Honorable Assemblyman Joe Baca, Jr. <br />Chair and Members, Assembly Committee on Housing and Community <br />Development <br />Chair and Members, Assembly Local Government Committee <br />Daniel Carrigg, League of California Cities <br />CnIC CENTER <br />650 N. La Cadens Drive <br />Colton, CA 92324 <br />(909)370-5099 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.