My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
060711
>
11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/1/2011 5:13:09 PM
Creation date
6/1/2011 5:00:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/7/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
pL£�S�4NTONo CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT <br />11 <br />June 7, 2011 <br />Community Development Department <br />TITLE: REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA <br />GOVERNMENT'S AND THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION <br />COMMISSION'S INITIAL VISION SCENARIO FOR THE BAY AREA <br />SUMMARY <br />This report describes the Initial Vision Scenario (IVS) for the Bay Area prepared by the <br />Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation <br />Commission (MTC) in response to Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable Communities <br />Strategy (SCS). The IVS is a first -cut proposal that identifies these regional agencies' <br />vision of where and how much growth is anticipated to occur by 2035 in the Bay Area. <br />The IVS also identifies land areas for conservation. In the IVS, 17,382 new jobs and <br />9,785 new dwelling units are anticipated in Pleasanton between 2010 and 2035. The <br />City Council may wish to provide feedback to ABAG and MTC at this time. Over the <br />next several months, ABAG and MTC will be developing alternative vision scenarios <br />and then a preferred scenario for the SCS. There will be future opportunities for local <br />governments and the public to comment on the scenarios. <br />A few cities in Alameda County, such as Newark and Hayward, and the Alameda <br />County Transportation Commission, whose staff has been working with staff from <br />member jurisdictions on a Countywide Transportation Plan, have commented to ABAG <br />and MTC. The comments have been similar: the regional growth projections are <br />unrealistic; funding for the assumed infrastructure improvements needed to support the <br />anticipated growth isn't available; and more information is needed in general, such as a <br />better map(s) with more detail. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Review and comment on the IVS and direct staff to provide its feedback, if any, to <br />ABAG and MTC. <br />If the Council wishes to comment on the IVS, ABAG suggested it may wish to comment <br />on the following questions /topics: <br />1. What additional funding would help support housing growth? <br />2. If the IVS growth estimate is too high, should some of the growth be shifted to <br />another part of the city or elsewhere in the region? <br />FINANCIAL STATEMENT <br />The regional Initial Vision Scenario will have no impacts on City of Pleasanton finances. <br />Long term growth of jobs and residential development envisioned in the scenario will <br />have implications for both revenues and expenditure for services which can be <br />evaluated when such projects are proposed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.