Laserfiche WebLink
Communication 1078 <br /> Bill 266 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> At the March 24, 2008 Planning Committee meeting Director Yuen explained that there are <br /> currently four Community Development Plans scheduled to be completed very shortly. <br /> Mr. Yuen stated that although the General Plan does provide that the Steering Committee shall <br /> submit the CDP to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation, it was missing a <br /> time frame to review and submit recommendations. Mr. Yuen noted that although the Planning <br /> Commission changed the review period from 60 days to 90 days, he strongly felt that the 60-day <br /> period was adequate and appropriate and therefore submitted Communication 1078.1 containing <br /> an amendment changing the review period back to 60 days. <br /> Council Chair Hoffmann expressed concern that "no action" taken by the Planning Commission <br /> would constitute a negative recommendation to the Council. Council Chair Hoffmann noted that <br /> Community Development Plans are generated out of community philosophies and not <br /> administrative or legislatively driven. Therefore, a "no action" that constitutes a "negative" <br /> recommendation is a slap in the face for the years of community work and would prefer that <br /> inaction on the part of the Planning Commission constitute "no" recommendation and not a <br /> "negative" recommendation. Director Yuen stated his hope is that the Commission will take <br /> action on CDPs however, in situations involving a split vote or insufficient number of votes, a <br /> negative recommendation would be the result. Mr. Yuen advised he would check with <br /> Corporation Counsel if a "no" recommendation instead of a "negative" recommendation can be <br /> implemented. <br /> Council Member Ford moved to amend Bi11266 with Communication 1078.1 from the Planning <br /> Director, changing it from 90 days back to 60 days. Council Member Jacobson spoke in favor of <br /> the proposed amendment noting the extensive work put forth by the communities on these <br /> crucially important plans. The amendment was approved. <br /> Committee Chair Pilago confirmed with the Director that the 60-day time frame will allow the <br /> Council to meet a December deadline and also expressed his concern regarding the provision that <br /> the Planning Commission has the power to reject the CDP entirely. Director Yuen noted that a <br /> full range of options under which the Commission is authorized to act had to be included and <br /> that an outright rejection of a CDP is just one of those options. Committee Chair Pilago <br /> confirmed that the County Council would be the final decision-maker and Director Yuen <br /> concurred, noting that it is clearly stated and understood that the County Council enacts <br /> Community Development Plans. <br /> Council Member Yagong expressed that since the General Plan states that the Planning <br /> Commission shall review the CDP, he honestly felt that a 60-day review period is too long. <br /> Mr. Yagong noted that rezoning requests were temporarily delayed because the Council wanted <br /> <br /> to allow time to complete the CDP process and therefore all draft CDPs should be forwarded to <br /> the Council as soon as possible to implement what the communities want. Mr. Yagong also <br /> noted that although it's been stated that the temporary delay on rezonings has not had an adverse <br /> effect, it has in fact impacted and slowed the construction and business economy. <br /> PC Report No. 79 <br /> <br />