15 - Laserfiche WebLink

DISCUSSION The City Council has initiated this discussion in part because of concerns arising out of litigation that challenges the validity of the housing cap and the fallout that might occur should the housing cap be set aside. As the City Council weighs its options for future growth management, it is important to note that any control that would act to constrain growth to the extent that the City could not plan to accommodate its share of the regional housing needs may likewise be vulnerable to a legal challenge. On the other hand, programs that are adopted to deal with specific short-term constraints, or that are enacted to achieve planning goals or standards, are less legally vulnerable. For example, if a community's sewer capacity were such that development could not occur due to the lack of sewer capacity, that (presumably) would be a short term constraint that could be remedied (or improved) over time. Moreover, a community could continue to plan for and accommodate development even if such development could not proceed immediately. Similarly, a community could adopt level of service standards for traffic that have to be met before development could occur. Such a standard would limit growth until additional improvements are put in place to meet the applicable standard. As Pleasanton looks at options for future growth control, one option would be to revive some aspects of the City's existing Growth Management Ordinance which have not been used in recent years, and /or amend the ordinance to ensure that a review of the adequacy of public facilities and infrastructure is part of the growth allocation system as well as part of the planning review of projects. For example, if the City Council so desired, it could reinstitute the requirement for formal growth management approval of projects, a requirement that has been dropped in recent years because the number of units applying for approval was well below the allocation threshold. The City Council could also call upon the Council's Growth Management committee to review projects on an annual basis. (As with the requirement for formal growth management approval, the Committee has not needed to convene in recent years because of the small number of residential projects being approved.) Furthermore, Council could also amend the ordinance to specifically reference City -wide standards for services and infrastructure such as intersection level of service, sewer capacity and water supply, and acres of parklands per 1,000 population. The ordinance currently provides for the City Council to use the information related to services and infrastructure included in the periodic Growth Management Report to evaluate the capacity to serve additional growth. Another approach would be to develop a growth management program that would align future growth with the major new themes of the General Plan. For example, if sustainability were a priority objective, measures could be developed that could score projects based on energy and water use, potential vehicle miles traveled, Green Building score, or estimated greenhouse gas emissions, and so on, and could require development to attain a minimum score to advance in the development process. This Page 4 of 5