|
and the Planning Commission is supposed to take it very seriously and follow that as a guidance,
<br />and the Planning Department in its recommendation is also supposed to take that as a guidance;
<br />but it’s not, it doesn’t absolutely prohibit the action from taking place.
<br />So to give another example, take the LUPAG maps in the General Plan, those act like a filter. So
<br />if you are not in an urban area in the LUPAG map, you are not supposed to approve an urban
<br />development. And that is mandatory. Now it doesn’t stop, you can still, you know, take a vote
<br />on it, but it is a mandatory aspect of it. Whereas in the General Plan, there are lots of policies
<br />that may, in any applications that you have, may be competing types of policies at a particular
<br />time, like – and I won’t take the exact language – but say the General Plan will have some
<br />policies in favor of preserving open space, and then they’ll have some policies in favor of
<br />producing housing, and then you come up with somebody who wants a rezoning to do a
<br />residential subdivision in what is an open area right now. And the people who live next to it may
<br />say, well, that’s our open space and point to this policy in the General Plan; and the people who
<br />want to do the residential development will say, well, look at these policies in favor of housing.
<br />So you have to choose then, you find a balance between competing policies; the policies are both
<br />there, they are both enacted in law, but they don’t tell you what to do in a particular situation. So
<br />in that respect the Community Development Plans are the same as the General Plan. What we
<br />are trying to do, though, is – and this is sort of one of the final polishing type points – trying to
<br />be really explicit about what are the must-dos and what are the should-dos.
<br />ALAMEDA: That’s good, very good.
<br />WATANABE: Okay. Any follow-up on that?
<br />ALAMEDA: No. Thank you. Very well articulated, the examples and everything.
<br />Thanks.
<br />DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman.
<br />WATANABE: Yes, Mr. Domingo.
<br />DOMINGO: Mr. Yuen, in the past the Development Plans were adopted as a resolution,
<br />by resolution, and now it will be adopted as an ordinance.
<br />YUEN: All right.
<br />DOMINGO: You know, I think that’s a fine, a good approach to the Community
<br />Development Plan because what it does is give the people within that community an opportunity
<br />to really decide the plan for their own community, and they can be explicit as to what their
<br />desires are and what their long-term views may be as far as growth is concerned. And what it
<br />does, you know, as we’ve often discussed, the LUPAG map is somewhat in my opinion, you
<br />know, it’s a wide, it’s a broad interpretation of what may be permitted in a certain area and
<br />where the line of demarcation would be. I think, I know for sure that the Community
<br />Development Plan would be an asset, a big asset in trying to help planners and regulators decide
<br />exactly where that line would be because the Development Plan would be more in detail. Now
<br />of course, the General Plan as I understand it is, you know, it’s a broad, it’s a document which
<br />projects development, land use development throughout the entire county, and it consists of
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />5
<br />
<br />
|