Laserfiche WebLink
293 <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Butler, and seconded by Ms. Mohr, to <br />direct staff to proceed with processing the Committee's <br />recommendations, according to the process called for in Measure M, <br />with the goal to schedule the Ridgelands Committee's recommendation <br />for the November 1991 election. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Scribner, and Mayor Mercer <br />NOES: Councilmember Tarver <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />Item 12b <br />1992 Growth Manaqement Allocations (SR 91:261) <br /> <br /> Mr. Woody Peteira, representing Shapell Industries of Northern <br />California, pointed out that the Growth Management Fee has <br />increased from $750 to $2,100, along with other fees a developer <br />must pay. He commented that Growth Management is paying for <br />itself while providing for an increased tax base. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that Mr. Butler and he had met with the <br />developers eligible for Growth Management approval. He presented <br />the proposed Growth Management approvals for 1992, 1993, 1994, <br />based on the Council's directive at the last Council meeting and <br />the developers' projections of what their occupancies would be for <br />those years. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler noted that the recommended approvals represented <br />the results of negotiations with the developers in terms of what <br />could be done as opposed to what the developers wanted. He pointed <br />out that the low level of development proposed for 1992 indicates <br />a significant change in direction when compared with the approvals <br />of the past years. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver indicated that he was not in favor of approving 99 <br />units for 1992 when there were still 343 unbuilt units from the <br />prior years' approvals. He expressed concern about the <br />overcrowding of schools, an over-extension of water capacity, <br />sewage capacity, noise problems, traffic issues, and air quality. <br />He commented that he could not understand how Council could <br />continue to approve development projects without addressing the <br />affordable housing issue. He stated that he did not believe a <br />$2,100 Growth Management fee would pay its way and that it would be <br />unwise to approve any more projects, especially since the Ruby Hill <br />Project has not been addressed. <br /> <br /> - 13 - <br /> 7-2-91 <br /> <br /> <br />