ORD 1729 - Laserfiche WebLink

"EXHIBIT B" FINDINGS During the General Plan Update, the General Plan Steering Committee and several of the subcommittees considered revisions to the General Plan concerning growth management. When the City Council adopted the 1996 General Plan, it provided that a study would be undertaken to determine if, consistent with law, the maximum number of housing units that may be constructed on an annual basis could be reduced, taking into account a number of factors. Thereafter, residents and representatives from the development community came forward and requested the City Council to establish an ad hoc growth management committee to study the existing growth management program and to make recommendations on revisions to the program. The Council agreed to that request and appointed 11 persons to the committee, representing a broad cross section of interests. The committee met between May and October 1997 in an effort to reach consensus on a growth management program that would take into account the General Plan's build out of 29,000 housing units, but would reflect that build out occurring in a more consistent and predictable way. The committee was also concerned that growth not outpace the City's ability to provide the necessary infrastructure and services so that the quality of life that exists in Pleasanton today is not negatively impacted. At the same time, the committee recognized that any new program needed to be fair and equitable to the development community, providing opportunities for development, but at a rate consistent with the community's goals. The committee, therefore, adopted a mission statement that provides that the committee would reach reasonable consensus on the rate of growth to build out, which rate reflects community sentiment; the attached ordinance is consistent with and carries out that mission statement. It revises the existing growth management system to provide for predictability and certainty for property owners, but reduces the potential for strain on the ability of Pleasanton to provide services. The Council finds that the growth management program, to date, has not accomplished the program's goal of predictable, orderly development; that the goal of allocations granted to project developers, resulting in units actually being built in the year of allocation, has not routinely occurred; and if the existing program remains in place, there is the possibility that a substantial number of units could be built within a short time frame, which, if it were to occur, could tax City services and infrastructure. The Council also finds (a) that there is a shortage of sewage capacity and although a sewer expansion project is being studied, Pleasanton's participation in that project is not assured; (b) that the traffic conditions of Interstates 680 and 580 have deteriorated such that traffic in the morning and evening peak periods is approaching gridlock; and (c) that the state fiscal policy toward cities and schools is unpredictable at best, and neither Pleasanton nor the School District can count on the State to provide the necessary funding for local operations.