RES 86445 - Laserfiche WebLink

a.4. Fact. Buildout of the former Plan would result in a ratio of jobs to housing of 2.26. Buildout of the Adopted General Plan would result in a ratio of 1.69. a.5. Finding. Adoption of the MDA, which would further reduce the imbalance between jobs and housing would result in the exacerbation of other effects, and may well increase congestion on both regional and local roadways. a.6. Fact. See Section X (Alternatives) b.1. B. Significant Effect. The development of Pleasanton as a regional employment center with more jobs than employed residents will substantially increase the pressure within Pleasanton for housing affordable to those of moderate and lower incomes. b.1. Finding. The project contains mitigation measures to provide for increased amounts of moderate and lower income housing. b.2. Fact. Low and moderate income housing will be exempted from the Growth Management Program. The Growth Management Program will also be utilized to generate funds for the provision of lower income housing. b.3. Fact. Incentives, such as reduced development fees and increased density will be provided to encourage the development of lower and moderate income housing. b.4. Fact There will be no yearly limit on the number of units approved with low-income exemptions. b.5. Fact. A minimum of 25% of the permits granted under the Growth Management Program will be for multiple family housing. b.6. Fact. At least 20% of each year's housing allocations will be available to moderate income housing units. b.7. Finding. The Maximum Development Alternative, although it would provide more housing units and, therefore, possible lower overall prices, would result in the exacerbation of other effects and is, therefore, infeasible. b.8. Fact. See Section X (Alternatives) b.1. b.9. Finding. The additional mitigation measure proposed to create a very high density and use category is infeasible and unnecessary. b.10. Fact. The existing high density category allows for unlimited density.