Committee studying growth measure appears amenable to changing
it
Since 1978, in one form or another, the city of Morgan Hill has
had growth control ordinances in place, passed by the city’s
voters, to help curb and manage development.
Committee studying growth measure appears amenable to changing it
Since 1978, in one form or another, the city of Morgan Hill has had growth control ordinances in place, passed by the city’s voters, to help curb and manage development.
Recently, however, the city was informed by the State Department of Housing and Urban Development that Morgan Hill was not on pace to be in compliance with the state’s projected housing needs.
As a result, city officials are working with a task force to consider making the existing Measure P more flexible by amending it on the Nov. 2003 ballot to allow for an increase in its housing unit allocations. It’s an odd move since neighboring counties and cities have threatened lawsuits to keep the state out of local planning issues.
On Tuesday night, members of the Measure P update committee met to discuss possible changes to the measure and the city’s housing needs.
“Even if we don’t need to amend it to get certified, we still want to continue to manage our growth rate beyond 2010-the year the current ordinance expires,” said City of Morgan Hill Planning Manager Jim Rowe.
His colleague agreed.
“I want to amend this now, while we still have a city council in place that is in favor of growth control,” said Measure P Committee Member Larry Carr, who is also on the Morgan Hill City Council. “In two to four years you could have a council that wants measure P to end and we could see rampant growth in this community.”
Measure P was enacted in 1990. It replaced Measure E, which was repealed and replaced with the updated measure because voters wanted its stricter growth control guidelines.
But many members of the community upset over the city’s willingness to bow down to the state and fear that by 2006 the state could up the ante again.
“If Measure P is amended, the people have to understand that the managed rate of growth will be no greater than it is under the current system,” said Rowe.
By state calculations, Morgan Hill is 236 units shy of its 2006 obligation, which is when the state’s current planning period ends.
State officials have given a tentative OK to the housing element of the city’s general plan. Building the additional 236 units would assure approval, city officials have been told.
State housing quotas are distributed in a lump sum to regional bodies such as the Association of Bay Area Governments, which is comprised of nine Bay Area counties. City housing elements are certified typically in five-year intervals. Originally, Morgan Hill’s quota was from 1999-2006 was more than 2,900. Negotiations with ABAG got the number cut to 2,400.
So far this year, the city has built 164 units. City officials calculate that at the present rate, Morgan Hill will be 236 units short-though nothing is etched in stone.
“We are looking to see that we haven’t overlooked anything that has been built as well as completed land that was annexed. So the number could go down somewhat,” said Rowe.
Cities and counties don’t have to show the state agency that the units were built, only that there are no impediments to the process.
Measure P set a population limit of 38,800 by 2010-the year the measure stops. Using the Measure P formula, the revised general plan set a goal of 48,000 by 2020.
Council members are hoping to have all of the changes in order to schedule public hearings and prepare a final version for the November ballot by February 2003.
Unlike other elements of the general plan, housing goals must be state certified.
While Morgan Hill is trying to avoid conflict and appease the state, other cities have taken a more radical approach with regards to the numbers increase.
The cities of Watsonville and Santa Cruz have sued the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments over similar findings.
“Basically 236 units is a year’s worth of growth for us,” said Rowe. “The concern is that statewide initiatives are being imposed at the local level to impose more growth than it wants. The need for housing is statewide.”
According to projections, every decade adds an additional 5 million to the state’s population.
As a result, the state’s metropolitan areas have run out of space for growth. For that reason, agencies like ABAG and AMBAG have increased dwelling number requirements in the more rural areas, such as the South County, because they are the last remaining areas to build on. ABAG looks at the number of jobs that are expected to be created in a given area with the existing housing element to derive at its numbers.
But Morgan Hill isn’t thrilled with ABAG’s methodology.
“The formula is calculated based on the number of jobs with the number of residents. In areas like Silicon Valley, there is a greater number of jobs than housing and they’re forcing growth in other areas like Morgan Hill and Gilroy,” said Rowe. “But we believe that methodology just makes us even more of a bedroom community. We believe that there should be more of a housing requirement where the jobs exist.”
Rowe suggested more multi-story dwellings and apartments in those areas.
The fear is that without compliance, the state could issue financial sanctions for counties and cities that don’t meet their housing quotas. So far, those have been shot down in the legislature the last two years. But they could be restored next session.
For that reason, developers and city planners say that the ordinance needs to be streamlined.
Also, city officials say, the expiration date of Measure P should be extended to 2020 to coincide with the expiration of the general plan, which was updated last year.
But others are concerned with the rush to get the amended ordinance on the ballot, if it doesn’t reach its sunset for another eight years.
“We just want to ensure that the city grows in an orderly way,” said Rowe.
