CCMIN061891 - Laserfiche WebLink

261 target allocation of 500 units. He added that if this is Council's choice as well, Mr. Butler and he would try to bring back a 1992 total in the 343-500 range, while attempting to push back as many projects as possible into the 1993-1994 time period. Ms. Scribner expressed concern that any allocation made for the coming years would be impacted by the water problems. She expressed further concern that there are already three overcrowded school facilities, with some approved projects that are not yet built. She indicated that Council should be more cautious in allocating Growth Management approvals so as not to exhaust the City's water supply or overcrowd the schools. Mr. Mercer stated that Staff projections are always high and that those projections are not always met. He indicated that as of June 1, 1991, 129 units have been completed, and another 179 are under construction, for a total of 299 units for the year. He added that except for the inordinate amount of apartments that were approved and exempted from Growth Management approval, the housing that the City has provided are occupied for the most part. Ms. Mohr commented that for budget and planning reasons, the Council has always tried to make good growth projections; however, because of unavoidable conditions such as a recession, there will always be a housing backlog. She indicated that it would be wise to include, as part of this year's Growth Management approval, a condition similar to that established in 1972 on sewer capacity, that the issuance of building permits will be subject to the availability of water. She added that Staff could tie that condition with mandatory, as opposed to voluntary, water rationing, and consider the retrofit concept as well, in the report for the next Council meeting on Growth Management allocations. Mr. Mercer stated that he would like to get direction from Council regarding what requirements or restrictions would be expected of the developers. Ms. Mohr indicated that there are two things about which the developers should be informed: (1) the dollar amount entailed if Council approves the retrofit program; and (2) the application of the sewer capacity philosophy on water availability, if approved by Council. She commented that the ordinance on the retrofit program should come before the Council at the same time that the Growth Management allocations are to be considered. Ms. Acosta stated that Staff could prepare the ordinance for the retrofit program for the next Council meeting; however, the Staff Report on that ordinance would not provide the developers with the costs of such a program. - 14 - 6-18-91