Laserfiche WebLink
annual allocation, the growth management ordinance has not come into play. However, <br /> in light of the elimination of the housing cap and State legislation related to meeting <br /> RHNA targets, the City Council could reinstitute existing practices such as the <br /> requirement for formal growth management approval of projects, a requirement that has <br /> been dropped in recent years because the number of units applying for approval was well <br /> below the allocation threshold. The City Council could also call upon the re- <br /> establishment of the Council's Growth Management Committee to review projects on an <br /> annual basis. (As with the requirement for formal growth management approval, the <br /> Committee has not needed to convene in recent years because of the small number of <br /> residential projects being approved.) <br /> In addition to amending current practices, the Council could utilize the Housing Element <br /> process to amend the ordinance to specifically reference City -wide standards for services <br /> and infrastructure such as intersection level of service, sewer capacity and water supply, <br /> and acres of parkland per 1,000 population. (The ordinance currently provides for the <br /> City Council to use the information related to services and infrastructure included in the <br /> periodic Growth Management Report to evaluate the capacity to serve additional growth.) <br /> Another approach would be to develop a growth management program that would align <br /> future growth with the major themes of the General Plan. For example, since <br /> sustainability is a current priority for the City, measures could be developed that would <br /> score projects based on energy and water use, potential vehicle miles traveled, Green <br /> Building score, or estimated greenhouse gas emissions, and so on, and could require <br /> development to attain a minimum score to advance in the development process. Other <br /> growth management measures could include: <br /> Pace the annual growth rate to ensure an annual average to a specific percentage of <br /> the population e.g. 1 2 etc.); <br /> Protection of natural amenities and environmental qualities of the community; <br /> Growth compatible with the City's capability to provide services related to schools, <br /> sewer and water services and recreational facilities; <br /> Development and Design standards related to physical, visual and fiscal policies; <br /> Assure development stays within the City's Urban Growth boundary; <br /> Maintenance of a jobs housing balance. <br /> DISCUSSION OF THE OPTIONS TO ADDRESS LITIGATION <br /> While there are many potential options and outcomes related to the litigation, staff and <br /> the City Council have identified three that are most plausible. A summary of these is as <br /> follows. <br /> Option 1- Continue to litigate in an attempt to have the Superior Court modify its order, <br /> and or to have a higher court overrule the lower court's ruling. <br /> With this option the City Council would direct staff and legal counsel to continue to litigate <br /> in an attempt to modify and or overturn the Court's ruling. It is anticipated that this course <br /> of action could take years to resolve, depending upon what particular steps the City <br /> pursues. <br /> Page 9 of 11 <br />