10 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

To satisfy the Court's ruling, the City may follow one of two courses. First, it may amend the October 2009 rezoning ordinance (No. 1998) to remove Section 5 so as to allow immediate development at the higher densities, rather than precluding it from occurring until after completion of the PUD amendment process. Alternatively, provided it does so in a manner that does not create any new barrier or disincentive to development, the City may opt to rezone sufficient properties elsewhere in the City to satisfy the unmet 1999 -2007 RHNA. The Court's ruling with respect to the rezonings creates an additional requirement. Specifically, the Court states that "the zoning and land -use changes need to be implemented such that they are without condition or need of future discretionary approval." Urban Habitat has advised the City that it interprets this requirement to mean that development following the rezonings would be "by right," meaning without discretionary review by the City other than design review. The City disagrees, and believes that the rezonings required by Program 19.1 were never intended to eliminate any need for future discretion by the City, and thus that the Court's ruling should be construed such that the rezonings would simply eliminate the need for amendment of the Hacienda PUD process. This aspect of the order appears to require further clarification, and will require litigation if the City pursues that course. 3. Cease issuing any non residential building and all related permits. Government Code section 65755 allows the Court to suspend the City's non residential permitting authority pending actions by the City to bring a non compliant General Plan into compliance with State law. At Urban Habitat's request, Judge Roesch exercised that discretion against the City. Pending the actions outlined above, the City will be precluded from approving any non residential building permits. Next Steps The City Council continues to confer with legal counsel in closed session. The City's legal counsel and a subcommittee of the City Council, consisting of Mayor Hosterman and Council member Cindy McGovern, have met with the petitioners and intervener regarding potential resolution of this matter. The options available to the Council will be discussed in greater detail on April 20, but consist, essentially, of: comply with the Court's ruling, as narrowly as permitted by law, continue to litigate, or negotiate a resolution. Page 5 of 6