2006-10-27 tcouncil - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

process up to a point of the County Council voting on it. They do not have that right with respect to the General Plan. Now, as a practical matter, theres no, you cant, its true that some of the amendments in the 80s, as I say, were the brainchild of the landowner, but they did convince either the Planning Director or, I think in most cases they were Planning Director-initiated amendments. They did convince the Planning Director to actually initiate the amendment. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:I have a procedural concern and that is, that arises out of the inclusion in the resolution on Page 2. How do I define this -. The paragraphs that begin BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Nos. 2 and 3, I guess my reading of those, those are contrary, those are provisions which are contrary to the General Plan 16.2.1. The first one talks about a 60-day and the Directormentions60-daytimetorespond;andtheGeneralPlanrequiresaminimumof120 days. And then the following paragraph talks about the Director presenting a resolution within the same 60-day period which is, in my interpretation, contrary to 16.2. So, I guess, my view is: That this resolution, because it violates the General Plan, is not a proper resolution; and that I dont think we should proceed with it at all; that if the Council wants to initiate this process it has to do it in compliance with General Plan 16.2, and it has not. It has attempted to start a process by placing conditions that are contrary to 16.2; and, therefore, I believe it should be ignored, and that we should send it back to Council and say do it over right, for one. The other concern I had is that, I understand the Directors concern about the use of the term feasibility study in 16.2, because its not a real clear and definite term. But I dont see, I guess, has it ever been done, a feasibility study for an interim amendment? YUEN:I am just not sure whether there has ever been a Council-initiated General Plan amendment. Phyllis, do you, are you aware of any? Im not aware of any. This is the first one that Im actually aware of, and certainly the first one in the last, the only one in the last six years. IWASHITA:Okay. Well, my concern is that it doesnt appear that what we have before us has anything that would, I would view, that complies with meeting that requirement of a feasibility study. So, whatever that is, and that I see it as problematic. But my main concern is really that the Council here by this resolution has violated 16.2 of the General Plan and we should not proceed until it does it correctly. ALAMEDA:Staff, I have a question. Actually -. YUEN:Let me -. ALAMEDA:Oh, go ahead. YUEN:Let me just make, first, the Be it resolved that says that the Council directs the completion of the feasibility study and Planning Commission public hearing within 60 days from the transmittal date of this resolution to the Planning Director, I did attend the meeting when they discussed the resolution. And I agree with you that the Council cannot require this. 6EXHIBIT B