Laserfiche WebLink
257 <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Council- <br />member Mohr, that Ordinance No. 972, to be read by title only and waiving further <br />reading thereof, extending the moratorium on the acceptance and processing of appli- <br />cations for and on the approval of (1) conversions of existing multiple family rental <br />dwellings to condominiums, community apartments, or cooperative housing projects, and <br />(2) subdivision of mobile home parks for a period of eight months, beginning on April <br />23, 1981, and extending until December 23, 1981, or until repealed specifically or <br />through the adoption of condominium conversion regulations, be adopted as an urgency <br />measure. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br />NOES: Councilmember Kephart <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer recessed the meeting at 10:30 P.M. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer reconvened the.meeting at 10:40 P.M.. <br /> <br />LEGAL STATUS OF THE RESIDENTIAL ALLOCATION PROGRAM <br /> Mr. Levine presented his report (SR 81:79) dated March 5, 1981, regarding this <br />matter. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open. <br /> <br /> Mr. Ted Fairfield, Civil Engineer, stated he felt some form of the Residential <br />Allocation Program should be retained for a period of time for protection; perhaps <br />a 2-3 year phasing so that projects that are now underway can be completed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Dudley Frost, representing Morrison Homes, stated he concurred with Mr. <br />Fairfield, and supported a streamlining of the Residential Allocation Program. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing <br />closed. <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Kephart, and seconded by Mayor <br />Mercer, to abolish the Residential Allocation Program on a phased approach which <br />would entail having two additional Residential Allocation Program allocations for <br />1982 and 1983, that no further phased approvals would be permitted thus developers <br />currently holding approvals could determine now whether to use their permits within <br />the next three years or wait until 1984 to build under the rules then in place, but <br />do not change growth controls or rate. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated he was opposed to the Residential Allocation Program in <br />the beginning, and had tried since that time to streamline it in whatever way pos- <br />sible to make it more workable. He stated that Council must manage growth in Pleasan- <br />ton and if the ResidentialAllocation Program is dissolved then growth would not be <br />controlled. Mayor Mercer withdrew his second to Councilmember Kephart's motion. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Butler seconded Councilmember Kephart's motion. He stated that <br />the Residential Allocation Program had created problems for the developers as well <br />as the City. The need for tight controls is not there anymore and he is in favor <br />of liberalizing the situation as much as possible but he is not in favor of no growth <br />control. Councilmember Butler requested that the motion include the idea of.studying <br />how to implement phase-out or the protection of rights that now exist and also study <br />how to modify growth controls in the growth management element. Councilmember Kephart <br />stated he wanted to exclude the growth management element. Motion withdrawn. <br /> <br /> 6. 4/21/81' <br /> <br /> <br />