My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2014
>
090214
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2015 4:56:24 PM
Creation date
8/27/2014 5:05:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/2/2014
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Responsible Agency: Housing Division, Housing Commission, City Council <br />Time Period: January 2016, then annually. <br />Funding Source: Housing Division Budget <br />To maintain the momentum behind adoption of the Housing Element Update and to inform the <br />future discussion of the IZO revisions, Staff is recommending that the IZO discussion occur by <br />January 2016, as indicated within Program 17.1. <br />Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) <br />Historically, the City of Pleasanton maintained a GMO to control residential growth consistent <br />with the City's approved Housing Cap. In 2006, the State, along with housing advocacy <br />groups, sued the City on the basis that the Housing Cap was discriminatory and did not allow <br />the City to meet State mandated RHNA requirements. The litigation was successful, and <br />resulted in the removal of the Housing Cap from the General Plan. The vast majority of growth <br />management allocations were issued between the time the Housing Element Update was <br />approved in 2012 and the end of the 4th RHNA cycle on June 30, 2014 due primarily to the <br />lack of housing sites inventory. Some residents of the community perceive the concentrated <br />issuance of growth management allocations in approximately the last two years of the previous <br />RHNA cycle as indicative of an unacceptably high rate of housing growth in the City. On an <br />average yearly basis through the duration of the last RHNA cycle, growth allocations were <br />consistent with the City's GMO. Approved development by year for the previous two Housing <br />Element cycles is provided below in Table 3. In light of the previous litigation, Staff has <br />reviewed and amended the GMO to better facilitate the planned metering of growth from this <br />point forward. The revised GMO has been designed to establish a predictable growth rate <br />which reflects the community's desire for planned growth and alleviates the potential for strain <br />on City services and infrastructure. In accordance with the City's approved GMO and <br />mandated RHNA requirements, the City will be limited to issuing building permits for 235 new <br />residential units per year. <br />Table 3: Entitled Housing Units per Year <br />Approved Approved <br />Year Units Year Units <br />2003 12 2009 19 <br />2004 12 2010 673 <br />2005 22 2011 42 <br />2006 79 2012 508 <br />2007 9 2013 1,148 <br />2008 130* 2014 274 <br />Total Units Approved 2003 -2014: 2,928 <br />Average Units Approved per Year: 244 <br />Not included within the 2008 approvals is the Windstar development approved to <br />construct 350 residential units. The project has since been superseded by the newly <br />approved Workday commercial development. <br />Case No. P14 -0440, City of Pleasanton Planning Commission <br />Page 8 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.