My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17A
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
061708
>
17A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/12/2008 4:49:08 PM
Creation date
6/12/2008 4:49:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/17/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
17A
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
District by $1.1 to $11.9 million when the housing cap is reached. The following table <br />summarizes the fiscal impacts: <br />Summa of Fiscal Im acts related to Housin Unit Definition <br /> Ranste of Reduction <br /> Minimum Maximum <br />Annual _ <br />Reduction in Net Revenues Per Year $ 101,000 $ 194,000 <br />One-Time Development Fees <br />City $ 6,539,148 $ 11,485,584 <br />Pleasanton Unified School District $ 1,083,456 $ 11,947,320 <br />Other Agencies $ 12.402.324 $ 15.094.332 <br />Total $ 20,024,928 $ 38 527,236 <br />In summary, the effects of the Initiative on hillside development and counting units <br />towards the housing cap, as well as the impacts to City revenues and operating <br />expenses, will vary depending upon the interpretation and implementation of the <br />Initiative. <br />CONCLUSION <br />The Initiative, if adopted, will impose additional regulations for hillside housing <br />developments proposed on steep slopes or near ridgetines, and potentially alter the <br />historical practice in the way housing units have been counted towards the housing cap. <br />Moreover, if the Initiative is adopted, many definitions (e.g. ridgeline; slope; independent <br />living; etc.) would need to be clarified and processes (e.g. how to measure slope; which <br />developments are exempt) developed consistent with the intent of the Initiative. <br />The City Council may consider: <br />. Accepting the report, and proceed to Item 17b. <br />Asking for voter approval of a ballot measure to establish a community task force, <br />including stake holders, to implement the principles in, and clarify the application of, <br />the Initiative. (Such Council sponsored initiative would be viewed as a <br />complementary ballot measure to the Initiative at issue here.) <br />Placing a measure on the ballot to reaffirm the 1996 General Plan policies for <br />ridgeline protection, growth control as well as other existing hillside development <br />regulations. (Such Council sponsored initiative would be viewed as an alternative to <br />the Initiative at issue here and would need to provide language that states that if it <br />received more votes than the Save Pleasanton Hill's & Housing Cap Initiative, the <br />Save Pleasanton's Hills Initiative would be of no force or effect.) <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.