<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sunroom Desk &#187; Affordable Housing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sunroomdesk.com/tag/affordable-housing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sunroomdesk.com</link>
	<description>A Glendale, California Outlook</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:25:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Less Parking, Density Bonuses, Live/Work Artists&#8217; Units Part of Salem St. Affordable Housing Proposal</title>
		<link>http://sunroomdesk.com/2010/02/05/less-parking-density-bonuses-livework-artists-units-part-of-salem-st-affordable-housing-proposal/</link>
		<comments>http://sunroomdesk.com/2010/02/05/less-parking-density-bonuses-livework-artists-units-part-of-salem-st-affordable-housing-proposal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:59:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Density Bonus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Downtown Specific Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glendale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Khan Consulting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Live/Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Low-Income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SB 1818]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sunroomdesk.com/?p=5067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Glendale, California Planning Commissioners approve use variance for 4 live/work units in 36-unit, 4-story affordable housing project near downtown.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span id="more-5067"></span><strong>What is Glendale city policy on development of Live/Work projects? What constitutes adequate parking for Live/Work units? What kinds of artist uses does Glendale envision for Live/Work businesses in residential areas?</strong></p>
<p>None of these questions were answered Wednesday when the <strong>Glendale Planning Commission approved a use variance to allow 4 live/work artist units in a new 4-story, 36-unit affordable housing project at 331 and 327 Salem Street</strong>. The proposed design will be eligible for state tax credits under SB 1818, include Silver LEED Certification, and provide 57 parking spaces (instead of the 81 that would normally be required under city code).</p>
<p>Consultant Rodney Khan gave the presentation, focusing on the city&#8217;s goal of increasing affordable housing and council&#8217;s stated goals of creating an arts district and encouraging live/work developments. Khan stressed that the site is only one block away from the Downtown Specific Plan area, where live/work units are already encouraged. <a href="http://www.ci.glendale.ca.us/planning/pdf_files/notices/ZA/ZA%20Public%20Notice%20327-331%20Salem%20_2_.pdf">Eligibility for the density bonus</a> was determined at a Zoning Administrator&#8217;s hearing just that morning.</p>
<p><strong>The lack of a city policy on live/work units</strong> had commissioners leaning toward postponement until after the Housing Authority/City Council joint meeting on the subject March 16. But when Planning Director Hassan Haghani and Khan both mentioned the project was on a tight deadline to apply for state tax credits, and the matter would be appealed directly to city council, commissioners decided to approve the project with recommendations.</p>
<p>The project is eligible for the state&#8217;s &#8220;density bonus&#8221; under SB 1818, a law that rewards affordable and low-income housing developments. Coincidentally, <a href="http://la.curbed.com/archives/2010/02/krekorian_lands_a_blow_on_valley_village_condo_project.php#comment-532868">Paul Krekorian&#8217;s defeat of a Valley Village apartment project and its SB 1818 claims</a> was featured Wednesday in CurbedLA.</p>
<p>Parking was a concern for some commissioners and several speakers who represented area property owners. <strong>The fact that live/work units might require special parking accommodations for deliveries, hours of business, clients, art showings, etc., was raised but not resolved.</strong></p>
<p>Eric Yesayan commented, <strong>&#8220;Regardless of how &#8216;green&#8217; this project is, we are still losing public parking.&#8221;</strong> Yesayan, Chang Lee, and Hank Sheets all had strong concerns about parking, while commission chair William Kane said, <strong>&#8220;I&#8217;m satisfied in terms of testimony that it is parking neutral.&#8221;</strong> Parking ended up being a secondary issue, as commissioners decided to approve the project instead of postpone it based on the state tax credit application deadline.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sunroomdesk.com/2010/02/05/less-parking-density-bonuses-livework-artists-units-part-of-salem-st-affordable-housing-proposal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Planning Department Changes ShouldStreamline Code Enforcement</title>
		<link>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/10/01/planning-department-changes-should-streamline-code-enforcement/</link>
		<comments>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/10/01/planning-department-changes-should-streamline-code-enforcement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:47:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correspondent</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Neighborhood Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Code Enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Community Planning Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Development Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glendale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Homeowner Associations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parks and Recreation and Community Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sunroomdesk.com/?p=3478</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Glendale, California Planning Department changes approved by city's homeowner groups.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span id="more-3478"></span>Glendale homeowner groups are optimistic that <strong>a reorganization of four of Glendale’s key departments will result in fewer bureaucratic headaches and more comprehensive and consistent code enforcement</strong>.  The reorganization was approved unanimously by the Glendale City Council on September 29, and is slated to be implemented by the end of November. </p>
<p>Under the reorganization, the Planning Department would become the Community Planning Department, which would oversee all land-use and entitlement issues in the city, including all permitting and code enforcement. Parks, Recreation and Community Services would become the Community Services and Parks Department, and would focus on the city’s social service programs. Development Services would become the Economic Development and Housing Department, which would oversee all redevelopment activity, affordable-housing development and the city’s Section 8 program.</p>
<p><strong>Homeowner groups are most interested in the combination of planning, permitting and code enforcement functions, which they say will help building processes be less confusing for residents.</strong>  Importantly, a unified department will also mean that staff can no longer “pass the buck” from one department to another when facing difficult planning and code enforcement issues.</p>
<p><strong>The restructuring is expected to save the City about $150,000 annually with the potential for more.</strong> <a href="http://www.glendalenewspress.com/articles/2009/09/22/politics/gnp-departments092209.txt">This Glendale News Press article has further details about the restructuring.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/10/01/planning-department-changes-should-streamline-code-enforcement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Triangle Project Will Boost Glendale Revenues, Provide Construction Jobs, and Worsen Area Traffic</title>
		<link>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/02/25/triangle-project-to-boost-glendale-revenues/</link>
		<comments>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/02/25/triangle-project-to-boost-glendale-revenues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:59:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Atwater]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glendale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mixed-Use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Redevelopment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[San Fernando Corridor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Triange Project]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sunroomdesk.com/?p=766</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Approved Triangle Project in Glendale offers clear financial benefits to the city, but retail and construction projections don't stand up to scrutiny, and increased traffic will impact locals doing business in the area.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span id="more-766"></span>Another flat lot along a major Glendale boulevard will be developed into a multistory, mixed-use development, adding to traffic congestion in the south part of Glendale.</p>
<p>The Triangle Project, a five-story, 218-unit complex with 54,000 feet of ground floor retail space, is &#8220;expected to generate a one-time payment of $760,000 to the city for park development and an additional $210,000 in annual revenue for parks and libraries within the San Fernando Road redevelopment zone,&#8221; according to <a href="http://glendalenewspress.com/articles/2009/02/25/politics/gnp-triangle25.txt">today&#8217;s Glendale News Press cover story</a>. The developer will also be paying the city $3.2 million in lieu of providing affordable housing in the project.</p>
<p>The $3.2 million is a good deal, especially since 218 units added to Glendale&#8217;s apartment inventory will exert downward pressure on rents anyway! New condos built on the east side of Brand Blvd. and new condo developments in surrounding cities are being converted to apartments due to the real estate crash. Rent-control advocates should be pleased.</p>
<p>The city is fortunate to have a revenue-boosting construction project like this going forward at such a difficult time. However, the beneficial gain in construction jobs is temporary, and the projection for a large number of new retail jobs is questionable. Who is opening new retail establishments right now? Retail sales are likely to shrink as a proportion of our local, state, and national economy for quite some time. The city can&#8217;t count on sales tax revenues just because new space is being built. Empty ground floor spaces have the potential to blight the area.</p>
<p>Also offsetting the clear gains to the city is the increased traffic congestion in the Glendale/Atwater area. Flat, spacious, single-level commercial lots with ample parking are grandfathered traffic and parking relief valves for our era. Each one lost frustrates those already doing business in the area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://sunroomdesk.com/2009/02/25/triangle-project-to-boost-glendale-revenues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

