My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2025
>
04-23
>
AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2025 5:17:26 PM
Creation date
4/22/2025 5:02:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/23/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
888
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of Pleasanton—Villages at the Quarry Project <br />Consistency Checklist 15183 Consistency Checklist <br /> <br /> <br />186 <br />Summary of Housing Element Update FEIR <br />The Housing Element Update FEIR indicated that development consistent <br />with the Housing Element Update could result in development on all of the <br />rezoned housing sites. If all the sites were to develop at their maximum <br />density, a total of approximately 2,532 K-12 students could be generated, <br />including approximately 1,377 students in Grades K-5, approximately 598 <br />students in Grades 6-8, and approximately 557 students in Grades 9-12. A <br />representative from Pleasanton Unified School District (PUSD) noted that new <br />students associated with development consistent with the Housing Element <br />Update could require the need to build additional capacity or new schools <br />to accommodate growth. Specifically, elementary schools in the northern <br />area of PUSD (Donlon and Fairlands) are currently impacted, and any further <br />housing would require students to be assigned to another campus. The <br />representative also noted that the current level of developer fees set by <br />State law is not sufficient to cover the full cost of facility impacts associated <br />with additional housing. <br />The General Plan includes policies and programs to ensure that school <br />facilities keep pace with new development. Notwithstanding these General <br />Plan policies and programs, while State law encourages coordination <br />between cities and school districts related to planning for school siting, State <br />law is also clear that long range master planning for school sites is ultimately <br />the responsibility of the school district (see California Government Code § <br />65352.2). Section 65995(h) of the California Government Code (SB 50), <br />clarifies that the payment of statutory fees “. . . is deemed to be full and <br />complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or <br />both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real <br />property.” <br />Additionally, as part of its efforts to anticipate and appropriately plan for <br />future growth, PUSD prepares a 7-year projection of student population, <br />updated annually, which looks at planned and proposed development <br />within its enrollment boundaries, as well as demographic shifts, and “mobility <br />factors” such as inter-district and inter-school transfers which over time affect <br />overall enrollment. It is noted that the most recent study takes into account <br />approximately 2,983 units of new residential development in Pleasanton <br />(including at least some sites that are part of the Housing Element Update). <br />Depending on other future enrollment trends, modifications to attendance <br />area maps may be undertaken by PUSD.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.